Who's the best president for the US economy?

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Who would be the best president for the US economy -- George W. Bush or John Kerry? Maybe neither, analysts say.
For the budget, it could make little difference, they said.
Bush wants to reinvigorate growth by making his temporary tax cuts permanent.
But Mark Zandi, analyst at economy.com, said those cuts had proved an inefficient form of stimulus, favoring particularly the rich, and making them permanent would be an error.
"It would be an economic mistake, it would institutionalize the budget deficits. Ultimately we'll see long-term interest rates rise significantly and that will be a major weight on the economy," Zandi said.
The president had not vetoed a single spending measure in his four years at the White House, he noted.
But "I don't think that Kerry will have a significantly different situation," Zandi said.
"He has proposed raising taxes on higher incomes, but also to use it on health coverage for the uninsured. At least on the paper, we end up with the same situation."
Both candidates have promised to halve the deficit in five years, after Bush's administration posted a record shortfall of 413 billion dollars for fiscal 2004, which closed on September 30.
"An expression used in golf is apt: you play the ball where it lies. In this case, the ball is in deep rough and the toughest holes are ahead," warned a report by the fiscal discipline advocate, Concord Coalition.
Each of the candidates' spending and revenue plans would cost a net 1.3 billion dollars, it estimated.
"They appear to be taking alternative routes to a similar destination," the coalition said in a report.
In the corporate world, some sectors certainly prefer a Bush presidency, such as the energy industry, for example, which likes the Republican leader's promises to make exploration easier.
"The other sector more nervous about a Kerry victory is the pharmaceutical area because they expect more pressure on cost containment," added American Enterprise Institute analyst John Makin.
For consumers, a win by the Democratic challenger would make a difference "for the low wage sector market because he vows to raise the minimum wage," said Jared Bernstein, of the Economic Policy Institute.
On trade, both candidates have an ambiguous position, saying they favor free trade but decrying the effect of foreign competition on American jobs.
For investors, it all depends on the markets.
"On the margin, a Bush victory would be good for the equity market, principally because as a part of Kerry's proposals he would raise back taxes on dividends for people making more than 200,000 dollars a year," Zandi said.
"For the bond market, a Kerry presidency would be better. With Bush, tax cuts would be made permanent, and this would lead to a large deficit and eventually higher long term interest rates."

10/31/2004 - 02:08 GMT - AFP