THE ECONOMY: Fact Sheet PRESIDENT BUSH WILL BE BEST FOR THE ECONOMY CLAIM LEADING ECONOMISTS AND BUSINESS COMMUNITY CLINTON WILL HAVE TO TAX THE MIDDLE CLASS o In a CBS interview, economist Edward Yardeni (a prestigious Wall Street economist, according to CBS correspondent Robert Krulwich) confirmed that Bill Clinton can't raise $150 billion by only taxing the rich. Question: "If Bill Clinton becomes president and needs to raise $150 billion in taxes, what happens?" Yardeni: "He's not going to get it by taxing people making over $200,000. There's just not enough money there." Question: "How low do you think he'd have to go?" Yardeni: "He would probably have to go to people probably making $50,000 or more, I think." (Source: "CBS This Morning," October 15, 1992) DEFICIT REDUCTION, INTEREST RATES, AND ECONOMIC GROWTH o As reported in Fortune magazine, the Boston Co. Economic Advisors, a respected nonpartisan forecasting firm, cited that the Bush Plan is better for the economy on several fronts. o Compared with the Clinton tax-and-spend plan, by 1996 the Bush Plan will result in greater budget deficit reduction, lower interest rates and stronger long-term growth. - More than 100 percent greater deficit reduction. - Interest rates almost a full percentage point lower. - Stronger long-term economic growth rate. o "While Clinton does promise to put the deficit on a declining long-term path, he would still leave us, under any reasonable GDP growth forecast, with a deficit hovering around $200 billion four years from now." (Source: Fortune, November 2, 1992) Page 2 THE BIG SPENDING DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS o Fortune magazine has identified another as-yet-unforeseen problem which Clinton might face: trying to control the Democratic Congress. - "The Congress will almost certainly pass his sweeping agenda but may insist on giving him far more than he asks for, which could swell the deficit even further." - The Clinton plan will create a "hailstorm of new taxes, environmental regulations, and social mandates such as guaranteed parental leave, mandatory worker training, and an inflation-adjusted minimum wage." (Source: Fortune, November 2, 1992) CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS BACK BUSH o A Fortune poll of CEO's in late July found that 85% supported President Bush and only 9% backed Clinton. (Source: Fortune, November 2, 1992) U.S. COMPETITIVENESS o As reported in The New York Times, a study by McKinsey and Company, Inc. "shows that the U.S. commands a significant lead over Europe and Japan in output per worker." According to the report, "Productivity is the ultimate yardstick of interna- tional competitiveness. It determines not only a Nation's standard of living but also status in the world." o The McKinsey study showed the U.S. is far ahead of Europe and Japan in overall output per worker. - In 1990, the average American full-time worker produced $49,600 in goods and services, while the average German worker produced only $44,200 and the average Japanese worker only $38,200. - In manufacturing, German and Japanese workers produced just 80 percent as much on average as American workers on an hourly basis. Page 3 - In fact, the report showed during the 1980s the U.S. widened its productivity lead against Germany. o The report's authors -- all long-time Democrats including Nobel Laureate Robert Solow, a high profile Bill Clinton supporter -- concluded that America's advantage comes from our Federal government's reluctance to shield our companies from the rigors of world-class competition. o The New York Times reported that Americans bent on improving our Nation's competitiveness would be ill advised to retreat from free trade, openness to foreign investment, and dereg- ulation -- all policies that have characterized the Reagan- Bush years. (Source: The New York Times, October 13, 1992) # # #