What was Bill Clinton's plan and the Democratic Party's plan to create Jobs in 1992 ?

What was Bill Clinton's plan and the Democratic Party's plan to create Jobs in 1992 ? Im asking how do Democrats plan to create private sector jobs for businesses small and or large did they ever have a plan ? The Republican plan seems to me to be across the board tax cuts and trickle down economics do Demorats have an economic plan ? If infrastructure is the Democrat's plan how does this help the private sector ? Did Clinton have a plan to create private sector jobs besides infrastructure ? I have heard that infrastructure jobs can help create other kinds of jobs since the workers have paychecks to spend but is the paycheck enough money ?

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by mikejohnson2006


None of these will work unless they give incentives for innovation and entrepeneurship, the other [SNIP]is just that [SNIP] and won't do a damn bit good because the private sector, as in large companies, has gone to India and China for cheap [SNIP]labor they WON'T get here and I am certainly not going to work for 20 cents an hour TYVM the small businesses are crippled by taxes and red tape (Thanks to the [SNIP]of big bussiness) so if anything the tax breaks should go the small business sector (Which they won't) and not to the corporate [SNIP] (which it will end up going to).

reply to post by mikejohnson2006


It was going to start with liberally soiling dresses and then stimulating the laundromat/dry-cleaning industries. Yes, a sort of trickle-down effect but a rather cloudy shot in the dark, in hind sight.

Everyone knows him and Al invented the internet.

Good luck with that one!

Obama's plan is to shut down the internet!

8 years of Bush, and 6 years of the tax breaks obviously did us wonders...

reply to post by mikejohnson2006


The answer lies within your wiki link; the proposed ideas were to raise taxes and reduce the deficit. Eventually leading to a reduction of $496 billion over five years and increased the top tax rate to 39.6%. It raised fuel taxes and social security taxes. His presidency ended with a total budget surplus of $236.2 billion. We began paying off the national debt with plans to be debt free by 2015. When Clinton took office in January of 1993, unemployment was at 7.3% by the time he left office in January of 2001 unemployment was at 4.2%.

Originally posted by links234
His presidency ended with a total budget surplus of $236.2 billion. We began paying off the national debt with plans to be debt free by 2015. When Clinton took office in January of 1993, unemployment was at 7.3% by the time he left office in January of 2001 unemployment was at 4.2%.

It is worth mentioning that the US had a republican House and Senate for the first time in 40 years under Clinton. Clinton didn't wield a significant amount of political power compared to previous executives whos partys controlled the House and the Senate.

Didnt Clinton loose his job?, not much of a plan lol.

reply to post by mikejohnson2006

do Demorats have an economic plan ?'

Their plan is the opposite of the Republicans. Don't cut taxes and hope it trickles down.

reply to post by mikejohnson2006


I recall it differently...

Bush Sr lost the reelection to Clinton due to the recession. Bush previous to that had implemented a plan that took some time for the economy to feel which wasn't felt fast enough to help his reelection and Clinton stepped in just as the Economy was rebounding.

Bill Clinton's plan worked.

"Don't [snip] with it"

I'm sorry what I meant to say is these empty heads are not smart enough to fix it, therefore thier plans are bogus, and stupid, and you cannot buy intelligence, but unintelligent people can buy office...go figure, the only real answer - stop spending, stop making the india and china world look good (IE no tax loopholes for outsourcing, in fact tariffs for outsourcing would stop that fast!) Why stop spending? Because if the money is worth diddly how can a business pay for labor without outsourcing? DUH! All the answers come from brainless drones, therefore they are all worthless, these guys have no critical thinking skills and that is apparent!

reply to post by mikejohnson2006


It's very difficult for the Government to increase jobs, or even to negatively effect the economy minus drastic regulation changes or tax increases. Tax decreases don't help the economy that much, but neither does building roads.

Clinton had no economic plan (that worked) he just happened to be sitting in office when the Dot Com Boom (and bust) began (and ended).. The bubble that exploded with the .com boom created hundreds of thousands of jobs, which in turn made million of jobs more over several years. It then burst in 1999. Then Republicans came into power and they had no economic plan (that worked) so they allowed credit expansion to go unchecked and waged a very expensive war (which actually does have a very positive effect on the economy .. but bad for the government) thus we had a credit bubble. That burst.

Obama has tried two different things .. create a Green bubble ... which failed miserably. Then to create a new Construction bubble by pumping hundreds of billions into the infrastructure in hopes of reviving manufacturing to complete the jobs. Had he paid attention to FDR he would have guessed the outcome: Failure.

The increase of jobs so far this year and Q2 and Q3 of last year were driven almost entirely on credit expansions. Personal lines of credit expanded massively and those too will soon max and the economy will experience another round of contractions.. Note this was not the plan of any government agency or politician .. it's a natural effect in a credit economy.. The part driving the consumption portions of the economy were redirected funds that normally went to mortgages and are now instead spent on consumer goods, food and credit debts.

Lesson of the story: The Government cannot fix it .. only make it worse down the road.

reply to post by Rockpuck


This is very true and that's what so many people like us are against the federal reserve. It's not the politicians themselves who design plans that make the economy better. They have SOME effect on what goes on. The federal reserve has the true power. I blame Warren Summers and Allen Greenspan.

reply to post by mikejohnson2006


What was Clinton's plan to create jobs back in the 90's; quite simply, he had no plan to create jobs back in the 90's. Back in those days, everybody knew it wasn't the government's job to "create" jobs for the people.

Back in the 90's, as I remember it, there was no shortage of jobs. If you had a good education and were willing to work hard, you would be able to find a job. Heck, even if you were lazy and stupid, you could still find a job somewhere, just maybe not as well paying as the jobs found by your harder working peers.

It was the free trade agreements begun under Clinton and expanded under Bush that chased most of the good jobs offshore. The US labor market can't compete with slave labor.

The best way to "create" jobs is for the government to get out of business's way and allow them to innovate, compete and expand without having to run to Uncle Sam for permission for everything they want to do. That and bring back a protectionist economy (tariffs and such) to protect American jobs, at least until the rest of the world catches up to the US in terms of labor rights and employee compensation.

Bill Clinton didn't really have an economic plan. He was lucky to be in office at the time of an emerging technology, that changed the world. He didn't campaign on balancing the budget, he was forced into it right along with the Republican brain child of NAFTA. He was lucky because the dotcom boom hid a lot of the damage that NAFTA was creating, so to most it was good times. The man was no genius by any stretch and really not all that great of a President, people just remember good times. Which is why he is viewed favorably.