Originally Posted by mistermojorizin
isn't this just a simplified explanation of republicans vs. democrats?
i think you're just looking at the expense side of things. How about the revenue side? the economy prospered under Clinton, a democrat, and is in the crapper under Bush, even though Bush cut taxes. When the economy tanked, business revenue suffered, businesses had to lay off employees. I would much rather pay a little extra in tax and have more job security and make my $40K bonuses than worry about not having enough work. Obama will be better for the economy than McCain, because you need to tax to be able to spend. Repubs think you can spend without taxing. Also, a big drain on the economy is the war. Economists don't believe, like they used to, that wars help the economy. It is killing our economy and McCain wants to perpetuate it.
also, i don't like analogies. they don't prove anything. they can be useful for explainig highly technical concepts in simplified terms if that concept is PROVEN already, but I don't think the concept of who will be better for our pocket book has been proven yet.
Are you aware that the last two quarters of 2000 and the first qtr of 2001 showed negative growth for 2 of those 3 periods? The economy under Clinton was marginally better than it has been under Bush and Clinton did not have to deal with the impact of 9/11 on the economy.
Economic growth fills the federal treasury more effectively than higher tax rates and higher marginal rates depress growth. Believing that raising taxes will lead to prosperity is just counter factual.
As for the war, John McCain does not want to prolong it, he wants to win it. Wars are not something you simply stop or end, you must either win or lose it.