Brian Schweitzer

[Gustaf]

RJ, are you sure you know what the word "proposal" means? It doesn't really sound like it when you put it like that...and I think the boom under Clinton to an extent might have been helped by Reagan's reforms of the economy, but was mostly due to factors out-side of political control, somethuing I think is true of most changes in the economy.

The budget does affect interest rates and has a negative long-term impact. It tends to bog down state-finances if left unchecked. Jake is correct however, that the economy affects the budget a lot, lot more than the other way around. 

[Gustaf]

Jake is correct however, that the economy affects the budget a lot, lot more than the other way around. 

We've seen record deficits in the last few years. Does that mean our economy today is the worst its ever been? Under Jimmy Carter, we didn't see soaring deficits. Was the economy in good shape when he was president?

I'll admit I took something Jake said out of context:

I see you've fallen victim to the idea that balancing a budget makes the economy grow, instead of the other way around.

It sounded like he said the opposite of a balanced budget means economic growth, refering to an unbalanced budget. I went to edit my earlier post and deleted it on accident.

I'm not sure what you're saying. If the economy goes badly tax revenue is likely to go down. But an unbalanced budget will tend to aid the economy short-term, certainly not create economic disaster.