The link between Obama's departure and your increasing wealth
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/367972-the-link-between-obamas-departure-and-your-increasing-wealth
If you are like me, your retirement account rose substantially in value during 2017.
The end of the stubborn economic lag of the Obama years is a signal event affecting the life every American. It's not just the stock market that's up, but GDP and job growth as well.
Presumably because it would make the Trump administration look good, the mainstream media have given this development relatively little attention - as illustrated by the New York Times' non-treatment in its 2017 year in review. (The Denver Post's Dec. 31 print edition review provides another example.) When the mainstream media have discussed the economy outside their business pages, they sometimes have done so only to belittle the progress made.
On the other side of the political divide, President Trump is (of course) claiming credit. No doubt he is entitled to some.
But let's face it: The election of almost any of the major presidential candidates other than avowed socialist Bernie Sanders probably would have triggered a similar boom. {True ... IF they slashed and burned government regulations like Trump has done ... IF they nominated Constitution-loving strict constructionists to the federal bench like Trump has done ... IF they reined in federal agencies and federal hiring like Trump has done ... etc., etc., etc. ... which makes this a ridiculous statement where Hillary and the vast majority of the Republican contenders are concerned!} It might have been greater under a President Rubio or President Kasich or less under a President Clinton. {Greater under Rubio or Kasich? ROTFLMAO - what a farce!} But the upsurge would have come because its principal cause has not been who was elected, but who has departed.
Those departed are Barack Obama and an administration comprised largely of soft-totalitarian "progressives" who showed little respect for the rule of law during their eight-year reign.
Economists across the political spectrum agree that the rule of law is key to a healthy economy, particularly in developed countries. When legal rules are clear and predictable, investors are more willing to risk their capital than when rules are fuzzy and subject to random change. ...
However, most of the threats to the rule of law came from executive action: a frenzy of new economic regulations; illegal immigration orders; unwarranted privileges to the politically-powerful, such as exemption from Obamacare mandates; the use of federal grants to skew scientific research; IRS attacks on dissident groups; subsidies to some businesses at the expense of others; and increased surveillance of political opponents.
Of course, the Obama administration was not the first presidency to threaten the rule of law. But most other serious presidential attacks occurred during wartime. Moreover, the Obama administration's assault was unusually comprehensive - far more so than, for example, sporadic efforts by prior presidents to turn the IRS against political enemies.
President Trump also has expressed an unfortunate preference for distorting the legal playing field. {Examples please?} But so far his administration has done nothing comparable to the Obama presidency's third-world-style behavior.
No wonder why so many Americans are breathing a sigh of relief - and then following it up with concrete investments in our country's future.
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. ~ D.H. Lawrence
| 
