As early as 2003, it seemed like the Federal Reserve was inflating the economy. There was some mild inflation in 2008 before the collapse. The reaction was to do exactly what Bush did in response to the 2001 recession.
People voting for "change" in 2008 got the same thing they thought they were voting against. In principle, Bush is no different from Obama. He is spending too much and using a loose monetary policy to support the economy.
The last decade has been a departure from what was working well in the nineties. But why was it working in the nineties? It's beginning to look like a stroke of good luck. There was a reasonable amount of restraint in Washington- fiscally and monetarily. What drove that seems to be suspicion of Clinton. Put that in contrast with the trust of Obama and one has to shake one's head. Just because Obama can keep his pants on in the Oval Office doesn't make him a better policy maker. But in the strange world of Washington D.C., the results obtained by the guy who got a Lewinsky appear to be the works of a genius.
That looks like praise of Clinton. But read it carefully. We were lucky! Now we may be "sol".
That pretty much sums it up for today. Mostly a discussion about economics, with a few space posts. Thanks for coming by. See you in the morning.
No comments:
Post a Comment