I’m repeating what I have placed on my financial blog because of its importance and relevance.
All economists seem to agree. A sharp economic downturn usually produces a very brisk economic upturn. So it is stupid, and a blatant demagogic ploy for an American president to blame his predecessor for any economic recession he may have inherited, yet cannot handle.
Fact: The worse an inherited downturn may have been, the better it makes a new president look, as the inevitable, impressive rebound occurs. All without government-changing and budget-busting stimuli.
However, we now have an incoming, bumbling, fumbling and meddling administration that has, by itself, created a deep, deep recession out of what should have been a normal, quick recovery.
They are thus looking for a convenient, political scapegoat. Certainly it’s not a classy effort, and it’s plain dumb.
Who do I really blame for all this ignorance getting continued economic play in America? The financial and general media who should know better and who has economic facts on hand.
Many members are stupid or often lean too leftward to report the basic economic historical facts. Good media reportage would refute the Obama administration’s whining about any inherited “Bush recession.”
(Note: Bush never mentioned the downturn he “inherited” from Clinton, nor did Reagan harp on the mess he got from Carter.)
No comments:
Post a Comment