• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Do Businessmen Make Good Presidents?

A

Anonymous

Guest
Do Businessmen Make Good Presidents?

Since the start of the 20th Century, only three Presidents have been voted out of office after a single term. All three, Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and George H.W. Bush, were businessmen.

It is startling but true that GDP has grown 45 times faster under Presidents with little or no business experience than when these businessmen were in office. The Presidents who had the best stock market growth, FDR, Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton, and Obama had essentially no business experience. The Dow has gained 16.8% per annum under Democrats with no business experience and lost 3.7% per year under Republicans with business experience. It is not clear why having business experience makes you a bad President; most likely there is no correlation between the business experience of the President and his performance on the economy.




Can a businessman help the economy? For presidents, the answer has been no.


By Robert S. McElvaine, The Washington Post

Mitt Romney likes to argue that his business experience has prepared him for the challenges of the presidency, particularly in stoking economic recovery. In his speech accepting the Republican presidential nomination, Romney declared that President Obama “took office without the basic qualification that most Americans have and one that was essential to his task. He had almost no experience working in a business.”

But historically, has the economy been healthier in times when the president has had a business background?

As any good executive would, let’s look at the numbers.

Since Herbert Hoover’s 1928 election, the American people have voted out of office after a single term only three elected presidents: Hoover, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush — all of whom were successful businessmen before they were president. And the only successful business-trained president who was reelected, George W. Bush, oversaw an economic collapse at the end of his second term.

As measured in constant 2005 dollars starting on Jan. 1 of the year after they took office — the economy’s performance in the first year of a presidency is better assigned to the preceding administration — the four presidents with successful business careers had the four worst records in terms of gross domestic product performance.

The only president since Hoover with business experience under whom the economy did well was the one who was unsuccessful in business: Harry Truman, whose haberdashery shop went bankrupt after two years.

The startling bottom line is that the nation’s GDP has grown more than 45 times faster under presidents with little or no business experience than it has under presidents with successful business careers. And on average, when there has been a successful businessman in the Oval Office (so, Truman is excluded), GDP growth has been negligible.

On average, under presidents with successful business experience, GDP has increased 0.12 percent. And under presidents with little or no business experience, GDP has grown 5.46 percent.

The story is much the same when we look at share prices in this time frame.

None of the five presidents under whom the stock market has had its best performances — Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower — had significant business experience. Topping the list are the two most recent career-politician presidents, Clinton and Obama, both of whom pursued economic policies that Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, insist are anti-business and economically disastrous.

Three of the four presidents under whom the stock market has had its worst showings — Hoover, Carter and George W. Bush — had successful business experience. Carter, the only Democratic president in this period who prospered in business, had run a very profitable peanut enterprise. But his economic record as president was so bad that Reagan defeated him in 1980 in large part by pointing to the very high “misery index” created by high unemployment and inflation under Carter.

Stock values have averaged a robust 14.2 percent annual gain under presidents without business experience, and they have fallen by an average of 3 percent annually under those with that “essential” qualification.

The most startling figures emerge when we combine party and business experience. Historically, a Democrat without business experience has been extraordinarily better for the economy and the stock market than a Republican who had a career in business. In the past 84 years, GDP has grown 7 percent per year under Democrats without business experience (FDR, JFK, LBJ, Clinton and Obama) and fallen by 0.2 percent per year under Republicans with business experience (Hoover and the two Bushes). The Dow has risen an average of 16.8 percent per year under Democrats without business experience and has fallen by 3.7 percent per year under Republicans with business experience.

It is often said that a president has little control over the economy, but that is only partially true. A president and governmental policies act with the economy as farmers do with crops. Crops and economies grow on their own, but how well they grow is greatly affected by the actions of those providing water, fertilizer, weed removal and so forth.

There is a saying: “If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.” Perhaps it should be amended to: “If you want to live like a successful Republican businessperson, vote for a Democrat without business experience.”

Romney might need to find a better way to sell his experience.
 

Mike

Well-known member
I can only wonder if the idiot that wrote this knows the stock market has been propped up for the last 3 years by the Fed?

Does he have any clue that some presedential agenda's have a lag time without an immediate effect?

Doesn't he realize that Bush inherited a Recession?

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The committee of economists that sets the dates of U.S. recessions and expansions is considering moving the starting point of the latest recession to as early as November 2000 --
 

Mike

Well-known member
katrina said:
I say what a bunch of horse pucky...... :roll: Who dreams up this crapola??

I know several ranchers that are overweight. Does that mean all ranchers are fat? :lol:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
OT since few of us make our living off stocks adn bonds can you tell me what happend to the price of groceries, oil, gasoline, employment rates and things of that nature during those times??
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TexasBred said:
OT since few of us make our living off stocks adn bonds can you tell me what happend to the price of groceries, oil, gasoline, employment rates and things of that nature during those times??

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=588074#588074
 

gmacbeef

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Do Businessmen Make Good Presidents?

Since the start of the 20th Century, only three Presidents have been voted out of office after a single term. All three, Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and George H.W. Bush, were businessmen.

It is startling but true that GDP has grown 45 times faster under Presidents with little or no business experience than when these businessmen were in office. The Presidents who had the best stock market growth, FDR, Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton, and Obama had essentially no business experience. The Dow has gained 16.8% per annum under Democrats with no business experience and lost 3.7% per year under Republicans with business experience. It is not clear why having business experience makes you a bad President; most likely there is no correlation between the business experience of the President and his performance on the economy.




Can a businessman help the economy? For presidents, the answer has been no.


By Robert S. McElvaine, The Washington Post

Mitt Romney likes to argue that his business experience has prepared him for the challenges of the presidency, particularly in stoking economic recovery. In his speech accepting the Republican presidential nomination, Romney declared that President Obama “took office without the basic qualification that most Americans have and one that was essential to his task. He had almost no experience working in a business.”

But historically, has the economy been healthier in times when the president has had a business background?

As any good executive would, let’s look at the numbers.

Since Herbert Hoover’s 1928 election, the American people have voted out of office after a single term only three elected presidents: Hoover, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush — all of whom were successful businessmen before they were president. And the only successful business-trained president who was reelected, George W. Bush, oversaw an economic collapse at the end of his second term.

As measured in constant 2005 dollars starting on Jan. 1 of the year after they took office — the economy’s performance in the first year of a presidency is better assigned to the preceding administration — the four presidents with successful business careers had the four worst records in terms of gross domestic product performance.

The only president since Hoover with business experience under whom the economy did well was the one who was unsuccessful in business: Harry Truman, whose haberdashery shop went bankrupt after two years.

The startling bottom line is that the nation’s GDP has grown more than 45 times faster under presidents with little or no business experience than it has under presidents with successful business careers. And on average, when there has been a successful businessman in the Oval Office (so, Truman is excluded), GDP growth has been negligible.

On average, under presidents with successful business experience, GDP has increased 0.12 percent. And under presidents with little or no business experience, GDP has grown 5.46 percent.

The story is much the same when we look at share prices in this time frame.

None of the five presidents under whom the stock market has had its best performances — Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower — had significant business experience. Topping the list are the two most recent career-politician presidents, Clinton and Obama, both of whom pursued economic policies that Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, insist are anti-business and economically disastrous.

Three of the four presidents under whom the stock market has had its worst showings — Hoover, Carter and George W. Bush — had successful business experience. Carter, the only Democratic president in this period who prospered in business, had run a very profitable peanut enterprise. But his economic record as president was so bad that Reagan defeated him in 1980 in large part by pointing to the very high “misery index” created by high unemployment and inflation under Carter.

Stock values have averaged a robust 14.2 percent annual gain under presidents without business experience, and they have fallen by an average of 3 percent annually under those with that “essential” qualification.

The most startling figures emerge when we combine party and business experience. Historically, a Democrat without business experience has been extraordinarily better for the economy and the stock market than a Republican who had a career in business. In the past 84 years, GDP has grown 7 percent per year under Democrats without business experience (FDR, JFK, LBJ, Clinton and Obama) and fallen by 0.2 percent per year under Republicans with business experience (Hoover and the two Bushes). The Dow has risen an average of 16.8 percent per year under Democrats without business experience and has fallen by 3.7 percent per year under Republicans with business experience.

It is often said that a president has little control over the economy, but that is only partially true. A president and governmental policies act with the economy as farmers do with crops. Crops and economies grow on their own, but how well they grow is greatly affected by the actions of those providing water, fertilizer, weed removal and so forth.

There is a saying: “If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.” Perhaps it should be amended to: “If you want to live like a successful Republican businessperson, vote for a Democrat without business experience.”

Romney might need to find a better way to sell his experience.

apparently once again you are IGNORANT TO THE FACTS ! Read the last sentence of the 1st quote you cited. " most likely there is NO correlation between the business experience of the President & his performance on the economy." You make discrediting you so EASY.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
obviously OT posted this to show he endorses Johnson.


A successful businessman before running for office in 1994, Gov. Johnson started a door-to-door handyman business to help pay his way through college. Twenty years later, he had grown the firm into one of the largest construction companies in New Mexico with over 1,000 employees. Not surprisingly, Governor Johnson brings a distinctly business-like mentality to governing, believing that decisions should be made based on cost-benefit analysis rather than strict ideology.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/about
 
Top