Are you better off now than you were four years ago?
 

When I first voted for a President (wow, back in 1984), I can remember hearing Ronald Reagan use those words in the 1980 Presidential debate against Carter, and that is how I based my vote-the 80's were a great decade of greed and excess, and boy, did I take advantage of that! I wasn't concerned about "the evil empire" or Star Wars defense, or even Iran-Contra; no, all I cared about was making and spending money. So, screw you Mondale, and four more years of Ronnie!

As I have gotten older, my priorities have changed considerably, but I ALWAYS ask myself before I cast my vote, "...Am I better off today than I was four years ago?" In 1988 I was, but in 1992 I wasn't. 1996 yes, and 2000, also yes.

For me, looking back at presidental elections since WWII, it seems that the element of fear has always paid a prominent role in deciding who gets elected on both sides-Harry Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Reagan have all used the "fear factor" to persuade voters to vote for them. Whether it was the "Red Scare" or the "Cubans" or the Vietcong, our lives have always been in danger from outside forces. While I am certainly very thankful that we do have a strong military, I am also very cognizant of the fact that we are never truly safe, a fact that 9/11 brought to the forefront for all U.S. citizens.

Since I am not a fearful person by nature, for me, the threat of enemy attack is not my number one priority for casting a vote for a particular candidate. I personally feel that I face far greater risks to my life on a daily basis than what might happen if either Bush or Kerry is elected, and I am alright with that. However, I am sure that everyone has certain issues that mean more to them than others-whether it is national security, the economy, jobs, heathcare for all Americans, or whatever. So for me, and me alone, when I choose (and yes, I am really one of the "undecided" voters-although I am now leaning a particular way), I am going to ask myself, "...Am I better off in November, 2004 than I was in November, 2000?", and that is how I will vote.

I sincerely hope that others will be able to say the same...

I personally am.

But I finished my bachelor's degree program, so that'll happen.

Big fat no on that one.
While I have finished two BS degrees, I can't find a job that will put my skills to use. Basically, I can work the same jobs for the same hourly wage that I could have gotten without a college degree. I ended up taking a position in Americorp for lack of finding something that will pay well...hoping that after a year of service, I will be able to gain connections and get a "real" job. Very depressing that unless I participated in the Americorp program, I would still be answering phones and doing secretarial work.

Nice philosophy though..."Am I better off?" I'll have to remember that one to tell my friends.

Yes. 4 years ago we inherited an economy that scared me. Now I'm not exactly excited about the economy, but there is low volatility and I hope it gets exciting soon - or at least exciting by the time I go to and come out of grad school and whatnot.

In terms of personal wealth, my equity portfolio is up and that is tied to Bush really. If I get heavier into bonds and debt, then maybe I'd have an interest in Kerry. Now I am worried and feel as if I have to hedge.

-Rudey

What does the President have to do with the economy?

The Pres. has the ability to replace Alan Greenspan who has the ability to raise and lower interest rates. That's about it for a direct connection. There's a larger connection between policies and legislation going through congress and how they affect businesses and corporations.
As for tariffs... that's a whole other boat.

What did Bill Clinton do to promote the strong economy of the 90's?

So nothing? Even what you mentioned about someone like Greenspan isn't right.

-Rudey

Ahem, before you use strong economy, let's not forget the economy faltered towards the end of his term, before Bush came into office.

-Rudey

Agreed. But what did Clinton do to get the economy where it was before he left office?

This is an interesting question. I wish that I had an answer.


Personally, I don't know too many people who are better off now than they were in 2000 unless they increased their education during that time. A person has more opportunities with a degree than without one.

Yes I would like to know also. I learned in 9th grade Econ that the economy will always be on a cycle - it's good then it goes down then it goes back up. I have not heard anything to convince me that Clinton is really the one to thank for the good economy in the 90's or that Bush is the one to blame for the economy not doing well in the 00's.

I like it when people consider things that belong to someone else theirs.

That being said, I'm substantially worse off, considering I'm now 5 figures deep in student loan debt. That doesn't really matter though.

My parents are better off, but their wealth increase was not proportionate to the increase they experienced under the Bush I or Clinton administrations. My mom's employer is going down the toilet fast and is outsourcing like crazy. My dad's employer is so global that I don't foresee it being a problem.

All three of us are voting Kerry, however.

What do you mean?