That's odd Billy. I hust googled the phrase...The Longest Peacetime Economic Expansion In American History. Thye first post stated something a little different than your claim.
Friday, January 8, 1999
PRESIDENT CLINTON AND VICE PRESIDENT GORE:
THE LONGEST PERIOD OF PEACETIME ECONOMIC EXPANSION IN AMERICAN HISTORY
UNEMPLOYMENT AT A 29 YEAR LOW
The Clinton-Gore Administration Has Helped Create Nearly 18 Million New Jobs. Five years ago, President Clinton and Vice President Gore put in place a bold three-part economic strategy to: (1) cut the deficit, help reduce interest rates, and spur business investment; (2) invest in education, health care, and technology so that America was prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st Century; and (3) open markets abroad so that American workers would have a fair chance to compete and win across the globe. Under the economic leadership of President Clinton and Vice President Gore:
17.7 Million New Jobs Have Been Created -- 378,000 Were Added Last Month Alone. Since President Clinton and Vice President Gore took office, the American economy has added 17.7 million new jobs. Last month alone, 378,000 more jobs were added to the economy;
Unemployment Is At A 29-year low. In December, the unemployment rate dropped to 4.3 percent, its lowest level in 29 years. The unemployment rate has now been below 5 percent for the last 18 months;
Private Sector Employment Is Booming. Since 1993, the private sector has added 16.3 million new jobs, with over 2.5 million created in the last year alone. Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, 93 percent of new jobs have been in the private sector, the highest percentage in 50 years.
The Longest Peacetime Economic Expansion In American History. The President's Council on Economic Advisors (CEA) now believes that December will mark the 93rd consecutive month of economic expansion, making it the longest peacetime expansion in American history.
I don't claim to be a finacial genius or anything. I simply state that I don't pay attention to Fox News Netwotk and I believe this add 10 points to my IQ score, lol.
Most of the information I come across paints a different picture of Reaganomics.
http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/ … _cause.htm
How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America's Demise
By - March 30, 2010
It has been over a year now since "The Great Recession" officially began, and yet even a basic understanding of the real causes of America's economic problems has still not emerged in the public. Indeed new movements have emerged touting as solutions to our current economic problems many of the very policy ideas that are actually the causes of our current economic problems. The rallying cry of conservatives across America has been a "return to the policies of Reagan!" The claim of many American conservatives has been that Ronald Reagan faced similar economic conditions when he was elected, and he was able to turn the economy around, so we need to return to the principles he used to reinvigorate the American economy.
The reality is that the economic policies of the "Reagan Revolution" have been in effect for the past three decades, and it is these very policies that have caused the economic situation that America finds itself in today.
During his first presidential campaign Ronald Reagan campaigned against government spending, he campaigned on reducing the national debt, he campaigned for individual responsibility, and he campaigned for broader American capital ownership.
The effects of his policies, however, had all of the exact opposite effects, and yet amazingly even today the vast majority of all Americans, especially conservatives, still believe Reagan's rhetoric and not the real effects of his policies.
In 1980 Reagan campaigned against what he called "out of control" deficit spending by the federal government. He identified the source of this "out of control" spending largely as social welfare programs. Shortly after taking office in 1981 Reagan gave a televised speech to the country in which he stated:
"By 1960 our national debt stood at $284 billion. Congress in 1971 decided to put a ceiling of 400 billion on our ability to borrow. Today the debt is 934 billion. ...
Here you see two trend lines. The bottom line shows the increase in tax revenues. The red line on top is the increase in government spending. Both lines turn upward, reflecting the giant tax increase already built into the system for this year 1981, and the increases in spending built into the '81 and '82 budgets and on into the future. As you can see, the spending line rises at a steeper slant than the revenue line. And that gap between those lines illustrates the increasing deficits we've been running, including this year's $80 billion deficit. Now, in the second chart, the lines represent the positive effects when Congress accepts our economic program. Both lines continue to rise, allowing for necessary growth, but the gap narrows as spending cuts continue over the next few years until finally the two lines come together, meaning a balanced budget. I am confident that my administration can achieve that. At that point tax revenues, in spite of rate reductions, will be increasing faster than spending, which means we can look forward to further reductions in the tax rates....
Our aim is to increase our national wealth so all will have more, not just redistribute what we already have which is just a sharing of scarcity. We can begin to reward hard work and risk-taking, by forcing this Government to live within its means. Over the years we've let negative economic forces run out of control. We stalled the judgment day, but we no longer have that luxury. We're out of time. ...
We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981
The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".
source: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
Reagan then went on to claim that by reducing income tax rates it would increase the growth in income tax revenues, and that the principle of reduced rates leading to increasing revenue would lead to a cycle of income tax reductions resulting in ever growing income tax collections. In fact federal tax collections under Reagan grew at the lowest pace of any post WWII president and his successor George Bush was forced to raise taxes in order to avert a total budget calamity.
The final irony of this speech is that today is indeed our judgment day on the negative economic forces that Reagan himself unleashed. Reagan warned against leaving our children with an "unrepayable" massive debt and a shattered economy, yet at the time that Reagan took office the United States was a nation of savers and the government had barely any debt at all. The policies instituted by Reagan led to a massive ballooning of the national debt and turned a nation of savers into a nation of debtors. While the conditions that Reagan warned against did not even exist when he took office, Reagan himself set the forces in motion that would bring about the very conditions that he so direly warned against.
Not only did Reagan's policies lead to massive increases in the federal debt, but household debt grew as well while personal savings declined.
Of course I realize this is an attempt by the socialist Democrats to give the Repubs a bad name. Bill O'Lielly says so, right?
