When talking about US politics colleagues or friends often say that Bill Clinton was the best President of the last 30 years, because

• he "balanced the budget" (wrong: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget)
• there was widespread peace in the world (yes, but not thanks to him)
• the economy was booming (sure, see below)
• he was charismatic (true)

When Bill Clinton was elected President in 1992, he profited from 3 main developments:

• The Cold War was over. Thus, the military spending could be cut and the corresponding money could flow into other segments of the US society with a higher Return on Investment. You can see the "Per-capita military spending 1962–2015 (inflation-adjusted 2011 dollars)" in the following graph:

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

• The US boomer generation (born between 1946 and 1964) which is the biggest age cohort ever entered in a phase of their professional life where they reached the maximum of their earnings. This enabled them to invest a lot of money which led to lower interest rates, higher GDP growth and higher stock valuations.
• Especially in the late 1990s the FED wasn't willing or able to stop the nominal money growth. (https://www.shadowfed.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GoodfriendSOMC-October2015.pdf "Complicating matters further, apparently higher trend productivity growth at the time required higher real interest rates to make households and firms accept a steeper spending profile in line with faster productivity growth. Yet the Fed refrained from raising interest rates due to the East Asian currency crisis in 1997 and the Fed actually cut the federal funds rate by 75 basis points to 4.75 percent in the wake of the Russian default and failure of LTCM in late 1998. Equity prices rose ever higher in the second half of the 1990s. Tech stock prices nearly tripled in 1999 and the unemployment rate fell from 4.3 to 4 percent by year’s end.")

So, in my opinion, Bill Clinton profited from these 3 developments a lot, as people credited him with the increase in wealth, GDP, stock valuations and overall perceived world peace. His successor inherited the dotcom bubble, higher debt and 9/11 - and wouldn't make things better (but that is another story). ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wenn ich über US-Politik spreche, höre ich oft von Kollegen oder Freunden, dass Bill Clinton der beste US-Präsident der letzten 30 Jahre war, weil

• er "den US-Haushalt ausgeglichen hat" (falsch: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget)
• auf der Welt weitgehend Frieden herrschte (ja, aber nicht dank ihm)
• die Wirtschaft boomte (siehe unten)
• er charismatisch war (wahr)

Als Bill Clinton 1992 zum Präsidenten gewählt wurde, profitierte er von drei wichtigen Entwicklungen:

• Der Kalte Krieg war vorbei. So konnten die Militärausgaben gekürzt werden und das entsprechende Geld mit einem höheren Return on Investment in andere Segmente der US-Gesellschaft fließen. Die "Pro-Kopf-Militärausgaben 1962–2015 (inflationsbereinigte 2011-Dollar)" sind in der folgenden Grafik dargestellt:
  Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

• Die US-amerikanische Boomer-Generation (geboren zwischen 1946 und 1964) ist die größte Alterskohorte, die es jemals gab, und ist Anfang der 90er in eine Phase ihres Berufslebens eingetreten, in der sie das Maximum ihres Einkommens erreicht hat. Dies ermöglichte es ihnen, viel Geld zu investieren, was zu niedrigeren Zinssätzen, Wirtschaftswachstum und höheren Aktienbewertungen führte.

• Insbesondere in den späten 90ern war die FED nicht bereit oder in der Lage, das nominale Geldwachstum zu stoppen. (https://www.shadowfed.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GoodfriendSOMC-October2015.pdf: "Complicating matters further, apparently higher trend productivity growth at the time required higher real interest rates to make households and firms accept a steeper spending profile in line with faster productivity growth. Yet the Fed refrained from raising interest rates due to the East Asian currency crisis in 1997 and the Fed actually cut the federal funds rate by 75 basis points to 4.75 percent in the wake of the Russian default and failure of LTCM in late 1998. Equity prices rose ever higher in the second half of the 1990s. Tech stock prices nearly tripled in 1999 and the unemployment rate fell from 4.3 to 4 percent by year’s end.")

Meiner Meinung nach hat Bill Clinton also von diesen drei Entwicklungen sehr profitiert, da die Leute ihm den Anstieg des Wohlstands, des BIP, der Aktienbewertungen und den insgesamt wahrgenommenen Weltfrieden zugeschrieben haben. Sein Nachfolger erbte die Dotcom-Blase, höhere Schulden und den 11. September - und würde die Dinge nicht wirklich verbessern 🙄 (aber das ist eine andere Geschichte).