Although the previous post did an excellent job at analyzing all the presidential candidates and the potential economics ruckus each of them can cause. Let's step back as to what CAN a President do in term of bolstering the economy:
Government spending (expansionary fiscal policy)- The Federal Government's budget has to be approved by the budget committee in Congress every year. Although the President can propose a lot of different types of spending, the final say lies on Congress. Most often or not, the President has to compromise his/her plans with the Congress's (ie: Bill Clinton only got his increase in minimum wage plan for signing NAFTA in return) . Another way to boost spending without the Congress approval is for the President to move/invade country with our Army- defense spending would sure to shoot up. The downside to all of this is, of course, increase in budget deficit- which would required the government take out MORE debt- causing only one sure thing- INFLATION.
I'm not saying the President has no influence on the economy, but more often or not, the real power to "manipulate" the economy lies on the Federal Reserve. Even then, the economic/business cycle would often take on its course, ignoring the action(s) taken by the Fed or the President. The presidential candidates, of course, will promise a lot of CRAPS to their voters in order to get them voted to the office. That is why the candidate with the most campaigning money would have the biggest advantage (advertising 101?). I certainly think that the Presidential election is an over hyped event. We didn't care about the economy, abortion, death penalty, healthcare for the last 4 years. And all of the sudden, WHAM, the Presidential election is happening. All these issues get brought up. While most of us just live our lives with whatever problems throw at us ignoring those problems every 4 years. Hey, its not like the new President really has the power to get things done his/her way.
Voting for your favorite candidate isn't going to change much like I mentioned previously (he/she has limited power). On top of that, the electoral system furthers limit YOUR ability to vote in your favorite candidate- if you are in New York or California and you are a Republican that always vote Republican, your vote almost doesn't count since NY and Cali always vote Democrat. The real election battleground is the "swing" states such as FL and Ohio, they are the one who really have the power to decide who's our next president is (since the majority of the country is split up pretty evenly). So my suggestion is, move to one of these swing states, register yourself as that State's resident and vote there. Only then, YOU can make a difference.
I know I'm a skeptic. Look who we voted for the last eight years? Can you still put faith in this election system after what happened?
Don't even get me started with the rigged/broken voting machines/papers.
To end in a positive note, I've found the most useful tool for technicians and fundamentalists alike- AND ITS FREEEEEEEEE (can you complain?):
http://online.barrons.com/mktlab?mod=b_hpp_tools_screener
On a side note, I noticed that my blog posts have couple of grammatical errors. So to fix that problem, we are officially hiring an editor:
"Editor for a blog
Starting Salary: $0/hour, month, year
Interested candidates should post their resumes in the comment section"
$0 salary....ummm we used to call that...SLAVERY
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Yes the Fed Reserve does have the most power to "manipulate" the economic health of this country but do not forget that the President is the one who has say on who becomes a Fed Chairman. It is not the virtues of Alan Greenspan that got him a long term as a Fed Chairman, it's the fact that he appeals to the Presidents with his rate decrease at all important political junctures such as the 1996 election campaign.
Post a Comment