Clinton's programs was so much more beneficial than Reagan's programs simply because of the fact that raised taxes in the upper brackets and while the Republicans would like to believe that the benefits of Clinton era was simply the long-term effects of Reagan policies, they couldn't be more further from the truth. Clinton worked out budget cuts with the Republican congress that was broad and balanced.

One thing comes to mind, SPENDING. Clinton successfully cut spending than Reagan. The result was shrinking of federal deficit and eventually reversing. Reagan spent crazily than Clinton.

The higher taxes on the top brackets resulted in general circulation through earning and spending and which generated prosperity and more wealth. Employment rose, standard of living increased. The irony is that even the wealthy benefited simply because of the fact that they could live in a pleasant environment, be more fully the part of the normal population and put their money into steady income instead of risky gambles.

Everybody was better off. Rich, poor, black white, millionares, billionares, working people, unemployment rate dropped, housing it was the direct result of Clinton policy of raising taxes on the upper backets. Even the people under upper backets realized actually they had nothing to fear about. Reagan's keynesian trickle down economics caved to Clinton's fiscal policy. It is the sitting President not what is being inherited decides the economy.

The numbers speak for themselves, trickle-down economics helped the well-to-do richer only at the cost of sacrificing the middle class in the hope it trickles down. But Clinton's policies which helped working class people do better did not harm or penalize the wealthy. Every part of society benefitted greatly. Trickle-down theory does not work. Tickle-up works.