The Full Story On Clinton's Prosperity (Congress, Reagan, Obama, economy)

[Motion]

If I remember right, Clinton raised the tax rate to 39% and the country did fine. And this is exactly what Obama's doing--letting the tax cuts go back to where they were during the 90s.

This is in response to those who agree with Obama's taxes saying it's similar to Clinton's and with this it may bring the prosperity we had under Bill Clinton. But what I think people overlook about the Clinton 90's were the other factors that contributed to Clinton's economy that are no longer the same factors with today's economy.

Number one,Clinton didn't have any wars to fund and the Cold War had just ended(many would say thanks to Reagan) so there was no longer a Soviet Union around the he would have needed to increase defense spending for and this freed up money for other things. Second, there was also a tech explosion that made businesses more productive and effeciant in the 90's. Todays economy is very different than the one Clinton inherited in the 90's, especially with our two wars and financial collapse,so don't automaticlly think that we will see the same economic prosperity today that we saw under Bill Clinton by Obama adopting Clinton's tax rate. Some would also argue that Clinton had a republican congress keeping him in check with spending.

FactCheck.org: Were Clinton's policies responsible for the 1990s' economic growth?

[Motion]

This adds to one of my points.

Obama's budget also would allow some temporary tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to expire, effectively raising taxes on the rich. While these tax rates were in place during the 1990s and the economy boomed, it did so largely because of a rapid increase in productivity driven by spreading computer technology.

Returning tax rates on the rich to 1990s levels without the accompanying gains in productivity, in an effort to redistribute wealth, could result in a drag on the economy...

Rosy economic predictions underlie Obama's budget - Kansas City Star