DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**boffincash** · 09-05-2008, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by Guynemer
I hate to be "that guy" GePap, but this does not prove a link. Not even close. As I said, control for the Fed, control for oil prices, etc. etc., and then look at the data. There may well be a link, I don't know. But there are too many variables to say that it's due to the party sitting in the White House. Did you read this part of the article?

Such a large historical gap in economic performance between the two parties is rather surprising, because presidents have limited leverage over the nation’s economy. Most economists will tell you that Federal Reserve policy and oil prices, to name just two influences, are far more powerful than fiscal policy. Furthermore, as those mutual fund prospectuses constantly warn us, past results are no guarantee of future performance. But statistical regularities, like facts, are stubborn things. You bet against them at your peril.

The man who wrote this is a Democrat, and also a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, so he knows his economics.

Even if policy has nothing to do with it, why chance it and go with the Republicans and their statistical track record?

09-05-2008, 05:02 PM	#5
boffincash Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 643 Senior Member	Originally posted by Guynemer I hate to be "that guy" GePap, but this does not prove a link. Not even close. As I said, control for the Fed, control for oil prices, etc. etc., and then look at the data. There may well be a link, I don't know. But there are too many variables to say that it's due to the party sitting in the White House. Did you read this part of the article? Such a large historical gap in economic performance between the two parties is rather surprising, because presidents have limited leverage over the nation’s economy. Most economists will tell you that Federal Reserve policy and oil prices, to name just two influences, are far more powerful than fiscal policy. Furthermore, as those mutual fund prospectuses constantly warn us, past results are no guarantee of future performance. But statistical regularities, like facts, are stubborn things. You bet against them at your peril. The man who wrote this is a Democrat, and also a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, so he knows his economics. Even if policy has nothing to do with it, why chance it and go with the Republicans and their statistical track record?
	Quote