Bush and the GDP?

Question

For most of Bush (43)'s term, the GDP has risen steadily, as it did in the Clinton years. My question: is the rise in GDP during the past 7 years merely window dressing compared to the Clinton era when you consider the record trade debt, budget deficits and devaluation of the dollar during that period? I'm asking this from a non-bias viewpoint and I would appreciate non-biased answers from people who know the answer. Thanks.

Answer 1

No. Real GDP is real. However, it is not the only way to measure the economy. Clinton had Real GDP growth with low prices with it. This meant that the economy was more stable. The budget being balanced was helpful in keeping oil prices down, but trade defecits were massive in the 1990s too.

Much of Bush's growth has been from government spending, which is less effecient and more costly than private spending. The portion of the GDP from the government has grown, much of it from defecit spending. This means we will have to sacrifice more in the future, the costs of that will compound.

In other words, real GDP is real GDP, but it is not the only way to measure the well-being of a society. The Republicans have promised better economic managment and fiscal restraint, but they have failed to deliver.