Question: Who gets the blame (or credit) for the Economy?  Answer: "...It's the President, stupid!"  But does he really deserve it?  How influential is the President in shaping the economy?  All too often, the President of the United States of America is portrayed as almost single-handedly causing whatever turn the economy takes during his time in office.  This is a misunderstanding and a mis-statement of the relationship between the economy and the President.  The economy is shaped by too many factors to list them here, but in general they include influences from inside and outside our country.  Since the outside influences are varied and can affect our economy regardless of who is in office, I will focus only on the interior influences. There are two main (interior) groups who exert the greatest influence upon the economy of the USA: the People themselves and the Government (including both the President and the Legislative bodies both locally and nationally). 
     The People of our country actually do the work.  It is the people of the USA who have the greatest potential to affect the economy.  It is by our ingenuity and productivity that wealth is created.  In business, a productive worker enables a company to produce more profit with less expense.  This brings the business greater returns (more money).  This additional money can be used in a number of ways.  A business with greater income can improve it's financial situation by reducing debt or increasing savings, thus being a more stable environment for it's employees.  A business with greater income can improve working conditions for it's employees by upgrading equipment, developing safer and more efficient methods of production, and providing better training where needed.  A business could also pass a greater return to it's investors or give higher salaries or bonuses to it's employees.  All of this is only possible with the productivity and ingenuity of the People.  If the People are not productive, then the economy slows down. 
     The Government, by contrast, has very little to do with the creation of a good economy.  The Government helps to provide a stable and secure environment for the economy of the People to flourish, but beyond this basic support, the Government actually has a greater potential to negatively affect the economy. California's energy crisis of 2001 is a perfect example.  It is widely known that the failed partial de-regulation of California's energy industry, coupled with the burdensome laws which dampened the creation of any new energy production during the past decade, have together been very influential causes of the crisis.  The resulting situation would not have so suddenly arrived on their doorsteps had California allowed their energy industry to pass along their increased costs to the end consumer.  If California's energy industry would have more completely de-regulated, the result would have been a more reliable energy supply led by the demands of the market. 
     Regardless of how well-intentioned they may be, government regulations and intrusion into business affairs has a greater potential to reduce productivity and cause a negative effect on the economy.  Even when these regulations do not directly impact a specific business, the endless forms, questionnaires, and reports take time and money that would be better spent in other ways.  Many people will take issue with my push for less government involvement in the economy, so let me make clear here what I am not saying.  I am not saying that I think companies and/or individuals should be totally free from all regulatory constraints.  I am also not saying that they should not be held responsible for the results of their business activities.  Unfortunately, the current atmosphere in regards to government regulations and business is that the business is guilty until they prove themselves innocent.  The end result is that the company must employ a small army of lawyers, CPA's and bookkeepers to handle regulatory compliance.  What I am saying is that government involvement in the economy should be limited and very conservatively undertaken, lest the results be a dampening effect on the economy. 
     So, "Who deserves the credit for a good economy?"  I believe the largest applause belongs to the People, because the greatest potential for positive economic results rests with the hard-working people of the United States.  Conversely, a greater potential for a negative economic outcome rests with government involvement.  Except where reasonable concerns such as public health and safety dictate, government should get out of the way and allow the people to exercize their ingenuity and productivity.  The resulting economy will belong to the people. 
     In the words of Theodore Roosevelt, "The credit belongs to those who are actually in the arena, who strive valiantly, who know the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spend themselves in a worthy cause; who, at the best, know the triumph of high achievement and who, at the worst, if they fail, fail while daring greatly so that their place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."