Experts claim that the policies Bill Clinton followed as US president a quarter century ago will not rescue the current recession-plagued American economy with its industries destroyed by the free trade agreements he championed.
The policies Bill Clinton followed as US president a quarter century ago will not rescue the current recession-plagued American economy with its industries destroyed by the free trade agreements he championed, Experts told Sputnik.
“Several historical events blessed Bill Clinton’s economy — I don’t think they are replicable,” Ohio Northern University Assistant History Professor Robert Waters said. “There will be no economic expansion when Hillary Clinton takes office, and probably a recession will welcome her.”
Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton said this week that if elected to be US president in November, she will make her husband, the 42nd US president, in charge of economic policy.
“Making things worse, [current US President Barack] Obama’s regulations and the uncertainty they have produced are a permanent drag on the economy, and Hillary will use her phone and pen to bandage and expand them,” Waters warned.
Even if Hillary Clinton proves not to be the neo-conservative hawk that many people assume her to be, Obama’s defense and foreign policies are going to force increases in military spending, Waters predicted.
“She has promised, and her base will demand higher taxes and higher spending, which will be another drag on the economy. Personally, I think Hillary is at heart pretty far to the left and Bill is too, and they are opportunists, so they will move left for at least the first two years,” Waters continued.
All of the additional bureaucratic regulations imposed by Obama will make it hard for any technological breakthroughs during the Clinton years that could change the equation, Waters noted.
“Hillary has promised almost open borders and complained about Obama’s few fig leaf enforcement efforts, so [there will be] no tight labor markets at the bottom. Since the Democratic Party is a subsidiary of the tech industry, we will be friending a wave of foreign tech workers,” he maintained.
Waters concluded that the economic prospect for a Hillary Clinton presidency would be bleak and that her husband would not be able to transform the economy.
Retired Brown University Assistant Professor of Economics Barry Friedman expressed skepticism that Clinton would be given any effective power to make a difference in directing the US economy if his wife won the November election.
“Since when is a presidential spouse someone who is expected to take programmatic responsibility and be held accountable: Aren’t they supposed to be counselors and goodwill ambassadors and advocates?” Friedman asked.
Friedman said Bill Clinton had an impressive record on the economy during his own two terms of office, but he expressed skepticism that the former president would be able to repeat that achievement in the ill-defined role of being some kind of economic policy overlord.
RELATED ARTICLES
- Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey May Replace Joe Biden as Candidate
- Elon Musk Is Once Again World's Richest Person
- Bernie Sanders Slams Biden for $10 Billion Aid to Israel
- US House Passes Resolution Making Anti-Zionism a 'Hate Crime' in America
- Arnold Schwarzenegger: 'Democrats Want to F**k Up Every American City'
Loading ...
Policies that fucked America in the 90s really wont help America 20 years later!
Bill Clinton believes that sticking your penis into everything well help the economy!
The truth is there are no policies to help slaves except the policy of freedom from govt!
If your sick of being a slave….then dont vote for it!
He destroyed us,
How Bill Clinton’s Balanced Budget Destroyed The Economy …
http://www.businessinsider.com/…destroyed…economy-2012-9
The Untold Story Of How Clinton’s Budget Destroyed The American Economy. … a strong economy, Bill Clinton is remembered … Clinton Destroyed The Economy.
When President Bill Clinton signed off on the North American
Free Trade Agreement and the General Agreement on Trade & Tariffs in
1993, otherwise known as NAFTA/GATT, he quite literally slashed the economic
throat of the United States. We’ve been hemorrhaging jobs to foreign nations
like Communist China ever since.
Until 1993, the United States of America was the world’s
economic king, and our people enjoyed the highest standard of living in
recorded history. But NAFTA/GATT changed all that by virtually removing
all trade protections that ensured our general prosperity.
Compared to the United States, labor costs in China, Indonesia
and similar nations were substantially lower than what U.S. workers earned.
NAFTA/GATT allowed our corporations and U.S. entrepreneurs to move their
manufacturing technology overseas and take advantage of the reduced costs
of doing business, while avoiding our former trade protections that made
such a move prior to NAFTA/GATT unprofitable. For those enterprises that
made the move overseas right away, there was nothing but exorbitant profits
to be made.
What could be better for a typical American manufacturer?
You get to avoid all U.S. payroll taxes, worker’s compensation costs and
environmental regulations and hurdles. You no longer have to deal with
unions and provide employee benefits like health insurance and retirement
plans. You get to manufacture in China, Indonesia and similar foreign nations
to your heart’s content, and you still get to sell your products to the
U.S. consumer at the same or nearly the same cost as before.
Those who benefited are the stockholders of these firms
and their top CEOs and CFOs. If you had money to invest before NAFTA/GATT,
your returns on the investments spiked. But if you are just the typical
middle-class American family with an average $9,000.00 per month credit
card balance and little or no savings except what’s in your 401k, you didn’t
have the chance to participate in that gold rush. You were blind-sided
and left behind, and the immediate effect of NAFTA/GATT was for around five
million people who had high-paying, family wage paying manufacturing jobs
to lose them to low-wage workers overseas.