10 Governance Indicators


.
Real Ways To Reclaim Freedom For America
.

.
Creeple economists who signed either the 2003 or 2009 economic petitions: They should be asked why they have not resigned in disgrace, and whether they have paid back their stolen tax cuts, as stipulated by universal Democratic Party doctrine.
.
• Mary Huff Stevenson University of Massachusetts – Boston • John R. Stifler University of Massachusetts – Amherst • Peter Temin Massachusetts Institute of Technology • David Terkla University of Massachusetts – Boston • L. C. Thurow Massachusetts Institute of Technology • Christopher Tilly University of Massachusetts – Lowell • Gordon C. Winston Williams College • Gary Yohe Wesleyan University • Andrew Zimbalist Smith College • Roger E. Bolton Williams College • Alan de Brauw Williams College • Pascale Joassart University of Massachusetts – Boston • Lucie Schmidt Williams College • Stephen Sheppard Williams College • Lara Shore-Sheppard Williams College • Karl E. Case Wellesley College
.

Freeplenomics and Creeplenomics: The following is an analysis of over forty years of data illustrating that more freedom produces the improved results of demand, whereas reducing freedom provides the inferior results of need.

Premise: There are three branches that run the federal government – the presidency, the House and the Senate. So, there are in effect three branch-years per calendar year. Based on whether Democrats or Republicans controlled each of the three branches in each year since the 1960s, governance indicators can be objectively calculated that accurately indicate which party has been the best steward of the country over the last forty-some years. Ten prominent governance indicators were examined.


1. Federal government spending: Republicans spent less than Democrats by a significant 18% advantage per branch-year.

Branch-years Debt


2. Federal government revenue increase: Republican’s revenue increases were higher by a massive 144% advantage per branch-year over Democrats.

Branch-years Revenue


3. GDP growth: Republicans held an advantage of a valuable 7% per branch-year over Democrats.

Branch-years GDP


4. Dow Industrials returns: Investors earned a whopping 30% higher return under Republicans per branch-year than Democrats.

Branch-years Dow


5. Inflation: Under Republican governance, inflation was lower by a productive 23% advantage per branch-year than under Democrats.

Branch-years Inflation


6. Fixed 30 year mortgage rate: A deceptively slim but discernable 1.7% per branch-year Republican advantage over Democrats, that has saved American home buyers a lot of money over the decades.

Branch-years 30-YFM


7. Auto sales: 2% more automobiles as an indication of prominent economic growth were sold under Republicans per branch-year than under Democrats.

Branch-years Auto Sales


8. Homicide rate: An incredible 28% more murders occurred under Democrats per branch-year than under Republicans.

Branch-years Homicide Rate


9. Total job creation: Republican job creation held a substantial advantage of 12% per branch-year over Democrat job creation.

Branch-years Job Creation


10. Income growth for the poor: This is a real stunner (for creeple and sheeple anyway). Republican governance was beneficial to the income growth of the poor by an extraordinary 131% advantage per branch-year over that of Democrats!

Branch-years Poor Income


Summation: In every governance indicator Republican stewardship has held an advantage over Democrat stewardship of the country over the last forty-some years.

.
Creeple economists who signed either the 2003 or 2009 economic petitions: They should be asked why they have not resigned in disgrace, and whether they have paid back their stolen tax cuts, as stipulated by universal Democratic Party doctrine.
.
 • David. T. Ellwood Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government • James K. Galbraith Harvard University • Katharine Abraham University of Maryland • Alperovitz Gar University of Maryland • Carl F. Christ Johns Hopkins University • Christopher D. Carroll Johns Hopkins University • Jimmy Chan Johns Hopkins University • I. M. Destler University of Maryland • Joseph Froomkin • Joseph E. Harrington, Jr. Johns Hopkins University • Robert G. Lynch Washington College • Louis J. Maccini Johns Hopkins University • Ted R. Miller Pacific Institute for Research & Evaluation • Edward Montgomery University of Maryland • Amy K. Taylor • Jonah B. Gelbach University of Maryland, College Park • Rachel Connelly Bowdoin College • Zorina Khan Bowdoin College • Vaishali Mamgain University of Southern Maine • Bruce B. Roberts University of Southern Maine • Tom Tietenberg Colby College • David Vail Bowdoin College • John Fitzgerald Bowdoin College • William James Adams University of Michigan • David Arsen Michigan State University • Timothy J. Bartik Upjohn Institute • Michael H. Belzer Wayne State University • Peter Berg Michigan State University • Paul N. Courant University of Michigan • David B. Crary Eastern Michigan University • Sheldon Danziger University of Michigan • Ronald C. Fisher Michigan State University • Sherrie A. Kossoudji University of Michigan • Mordechai Kreinin Michigan State University • Margaret C. Levenstein University of Michigan • Jeffrey Mackie-Mason University of Michigan • James P. Morgan University of Michigan • Janet S. Netz University of Michigan • Gregory M. Saltzman Albion College and University of Michigan • A. Allan Schmid Michigan State University • Matthew D. Shapiro University of Michigan • Frank Thompson University of Michigan • Thomas E. Weisskopf University of Michigan • Linda Ewing International Union, UAW • James T Bonnen Michigan State University • Stephen V. Burks University of Minnesota • Robert J. Kozlowski Macalester College • Ann R. Markuson University of Minnesota • Andrew McLennan University of Minnesota • Amata Miller College of St. Catherine • Vernon W. Ruttan University of Minnesota • James G. Scoville University of Minnesota • Stephen H. Strand Carleton College • Arthur R. Williams Health Care Policy & Research, Mayo Clinic • Michael R Behr • Steven Fazzari Washington University • Charles Leven Washington University • Timothy McBride Univeristy of Missouri – St.Louis • John R. Conlon University of Mississippi • Marianne T. Hill Mississippi Center for Policy Research • Arthur Benavie University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill • Patrick Conway University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill • Helen F. Ladd Duke University • Lawrence Morse North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University • Pamela Nickless University of North Carolina – Asheville
.

Question: Now that you know this, why on earth would you vote for a Democratic House member, Democratic Senator or Democratic presidential candidate ever again?

Conundrum: The creeple who run the Democratic Party loudly proclaim that they run the country better than the Republican Party (where most freeple reside politically). But the numbers don’t lie, and they aren’t up for interpretation. The results were all tabulated from purely objective annual data publicly available over the internet (the years analyzed for each indicator are based on the data available at the time of research, not based on editing to get desired results). 10 to nothing – now that’s a “shellacking!” It is just a simple fact that the more that freeple run the country, the better that the country is run and the better the results.

[Creeple will be scoffing off the 10 governance indicators right now. Even though they have done no research on them (whereas I spent dozens of hours researching them), their paranoia has immediately yelled “NO!” in their minds. And that is enough for them. Hopefully not for you.]

Explanation: A government that is run based more on freedom produces better results right across the board than a government that is run based on big-mommy government collectivism (paranoia). Over 40 years of empirical evidence illustrates that these governance indicators cannot be denied. Case closed.

Conclusion: At the federal level, freedom provides better governance than does collectivism.

Need and Demand: Restore freedom to produce demand and create prosperity. Removing freedom reduces demand and increases need and impedes prosperity.


[This page is from The Paranoid Quiz website. To understand the context take the quiz.]
Advertisements