Share
Explore BrainMass

This post addresses economic growth and presidental terms.

I'm just looking for someone's opinion on the following question:

The third and fourth year of presidential terms have higher average rates of real growth than the first and second years. Do you think this is a coincidence or is it a reflection of political reality that politicians are more concerned about re-election than about creating long-run economic growth?

Solution Preview

I don't think it's a coincidence, I definitely think that it's because it is the period towards the end of the presidential term and there are thoughts of reelection. One of the main issues with this is that everyone's opinions will be different on the topic. Because there is no concrete evidence showing that it can be attributable entirely, or even in large part, to a reelection or to coincidence, there will never be a meeting of minds as to the exact causes. What we have to take into consideration is that because there are higher than average rates of real growth in the later part of the presidential term, there has to be a cause since this is the trend. We therefore need to look at motivations. What would be the motivation for the president to take actions during this two-year period that would stimulate growth more so than during the ...

Solution Summary

This solution discusses the following question:

The third and fourth year of presidential terms have higher average rates of real growth than the first and second years. Do you think this is a coincidence or is it a reflection of political reality that politicians are more concerned about re-election than about creating long-run economic growth?

$2.19