Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Rather than engaging in labeling I'm hoping that you'll try to prove that it turned the economy around. It was on the rebound well before the debt was accrued.Government debt spending and putting money in the hands of people who will spend it sure sounds Keynesian to me.
Increases in the debt started with the late 80's recessions and increased even more with the 82 recession. A lot of the increase in spending was due to military spending which would establish increased spending levels into the future.
It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.
The response will be "well, that's different"...Rather than engaging in labeling I'm hoping that you'll try to prove that it turned the economy around. It was on the rebound well before the debt was accrued.
Increases in the debt started with the late 80's recessions and increased even more with the 82 recession. A lot of the increase in spending was due to military spending which would establish increased spending levels into the future.
It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.
If deficit spending was good for the economy, then it should be booming right now, shouldn't it?
How do all you libturd morons explain the failure of deficit spending to work during the Obama administration?
Rather than engaging in labeling I'm hoping that you'll try to prove that it turned the economy around. It was on the rebound well before the debt was accrued.
Increases in the debt started with the late 80's recessions and increased even more with the 82 recession. A lot of the increase in spending was due to military spending which would establish increased spending levels into the future.
It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.
If deficit spending was good for the economy, then it should be booming right now, shouldn't it?
How do all you libturd morons explain the failure of deficit spending to work during the Obama administration?
What's awful about raising other people's taxes?Did the Gent from GE triple the national debt?Reaganomics?
Are you speaking of the idea where Government is seen as a threat to individual liberty, its powers, as a result starkly limited, its commerce limiting regulations slashed, it's cultural corrupting prohibited and the individual freed to exchange goods and services to the mutual profit of both parties, which, having profited the means of the individual to fulfill their needs, axiomatically profits the collective?
Or are ya talking about the fabled "Trickledown" projected upon Reagan, by the Progressive cult, wherein the POWERFUL seize the property of others and dole it out slowly to those 'down the cultural ladder'?
I doubt you're speaking of the former and expect you're referring to the latter, being wholly ignorant of the latter representing Keynesian Economics and Socialist (Progressive) governance.
"Tripling the National Debt -
"As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend. When Reagan came into office the national debt was $900 billion, by the time he left the national debt had tripled to $2.8 trillion."
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com
Which one percent of the US population became even richer from Reagan's profligate borrowing?
As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend.
That's awful! How much lower were revenues when Reagan left office, compared to when he was elected?
I don't know why you can't prove it. Seems simple enough. How do we know that the debt spending boosted the economy or the economy would have been in even better shape without the spending? Like I said, things started turning around almost immediately, long before the Dems got their spending increases.It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.
I did neither. I pointed out that you are brainwashed.So are you actually denying the truth in what I said or just complaining that I am educated?
You can't push your socialist views onto me since you can't back up anything.Are you denying that other countries have less income inequality and yet more socialist governments than the US? Are you denying the importance of markets in determining income inequality growth? Are you denying the impact globalization has had on US trade?
I am honestly curious how your thought process works and how far I have to push you before you start complaining that I am educated.
And that's a bad thing? I guess we can flip it around and say that why he's despised by liberals. Less access to other people's money. The fact is that it worked, GDP went up, not down. Completely opposite of libthink. Now, enough time has passed where new lemmings with no clue are regugitating the deceit of the left."Ronald Reagan is loved by conservatives and was loved by big business throughout his presidency and there's a reason for it.
When Reagan came into office in January of 1981, the top tax rate was 70%, but when he left office in 1989 the top tax rate was down to only 28%.
Lot's of folks were rich, I doubt they were all friends. Were you alive then? I remember famous actors lampooning him regularly. And visiously. I don't know why they didn't volunteer to pay mnore taxes, perhaps because liberalism and hypocrisy are two sides of the same coin. And again, revenues went up. Look it up instead of relying on spiteful op-ed pieces."As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
No, he had to deal with Democrats and the tax rate was much much lower when he left. That's called selective facts. Dishonest but expected from leftwing loons."In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office.
Tax Equity And Fiscal Responsibility Act Of 1982 (TEFRA) Definition | Investopedia"One example was when he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982.
Source?"Reagan raised taxes seven of the eight years he was in office and the tax increases were felt hardest by the lower and middle class."
Oh the irony.Surely you're not too stupid to doubt Reagan was anything except a corporate tool (like you)
What's awful about raising other people's taxes?Did the Gent from GE triple the national debt?
"Tripling the National Debt -
"As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend. When Reagan came into office the national debt was $900 billion, by the time he left the national debt had tripled to $2.8 trillion."
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com
Which one percent of the US population became even richer from Reagan's profligate borrowing?
As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend.
That's awful! How much lower were revenues when Reagan left office, compared to when he was elected?
"Ronald Reagan is loved by conservatives and was loved by big business throughout his presidency and there's a reason for it.
When Reagan came into office in January of 1981, the top tax rate was 70%, but when he left office in 1989 the top tax rate was down to only 28%.
"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
"In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office.
"One example was when he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982.
"Reagan raised taxes seven of the eight years he was in office and the tax increases were felt hardest by the lower and middle class."
Surely you're not too stupid to doubt Reagan was anything except a corporate tool (like you)
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com
What's awful about raising other people's taxes?As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend.
That's awful! How much lower were revenues when Reagan left office, compared to when he was elected?
"Ronald Reagan is loved by conservatives and was loved by big business throughout his presidency and there's a reason for it.
When Reagan came into office in January of 1981, the top tax rate was 70%, but when he left office in 1989 the top tax rate was down to only 28%.
"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
"In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office.
"One example was when he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982.
"Reagan raised taxes seven of the eight years he was in office and the tax increases were felt hardest by the lower and middle class."
Surely you're not too stupid to doubt Reagan was anything except a corporate tool (like you)
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com
"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
Prove it. Use facts and numbers, not feelings.
What's awful about raising other people's taxes?
"Ronald Reagan is loved by conservatives and was loved by big business throughout his presidency and there's a reason for it.
When Reagan came into office in January of 1981, the top tax rate was 70%, but when he left office in 1989 the top tax rate was down to only 28%.
"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
"In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office.
"One example was when he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982.
"Reagan raised taxes seven of the eight years he was in office and the tax increases were felt hardest by the lower and middle class."
Surely you're not too stupid to doubt Reagan was anything except a corporate tool (like you)
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com
"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
Prove it. Use facts and numbers, not feelings.
I could've sworn remembering tax revenue skyrocketing.
I don't know why you can't prove it. Seems simple enough. How do we know that the debt spending boosted the economy or the economy would have been in even better shape without the spending? Like I said, things started turning around almost immediately, long before the Dems got their spending increases.It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.
Try to focus.
I called your education brainwashing. You haven't supported a solitary thing, assertions are not support. How can you pay for tax cuts? And how is it that the INCREASED revenue had nothing to do with growth? You seem impervious to honesty.Military spending increases started before Reagan even took office peaking in the mid 80's. Debt spending exploded during this time as receipts couldn't keep up with outlays. Tax cuts and increases in military spending were paid for through debt.
This is a vastly different approach than responding to falling revenues with austerity.
You seem impervious to the truth and call education brainwashing.
Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?
A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?
Ready for the best part?
Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.
"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late 70s and early 80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.
"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."
"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the worlds top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.
"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."
Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality
There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."
I called your education brainwashing. You haven't supported a solitary thing, assertions are not support. How can you pay for tax cuts? And how is it that the INCREASED revenue had nothing to do with growth? You seem impervious to honesty.Military spending increases started before Reagan even took office peaking in the mid 80's. Debt spending exploded during this time as receipts couldn't keep up with outlays. Tax cuts and increases in military spending were paid for through debt.
This is a vastly different approach than responding to falling revenues with austerity.
You seem impervious to the truth and call education brainwashing.
Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?
A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?
Ready for the best part?
Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.
"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late 70s and early 80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.
"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."
"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the worlds top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.
"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."
Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality
There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."
What's awful about raising other people's taxes?Did the Gent from GE triple the national debt?
"Tripling the National Debt -
"As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend. When Reagan came into office the national debt was $900 billion, by the time he left the national debt had tripled to $2.8 trillion."
10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com
Which one percent of the US population became even richer from Reagan's profligate borrowing?
As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend.
That's awful! How much lower were revenues when Reagan left office, compared to when he was elected?
"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.
"In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office.
Rather than engaging in labeling I'm hoping that you'll try to prove that it turned the economy around. It was on the rebound well before the debt was accrued.
Increases in the debt started with the late 80's recessions and increased even more with the 82 recession. A lot of the increase in spending was due to military spending which would establish increased spending levels into the future.
It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.
If deficit spending was good for the economy, then it should be booming right now, shouldn't it?
How do all you libturd morons explain the failure of deficit spending to work during the Obama administration?
I called your bluff, then and now.I have not supported that Reagan used massive increases in debt spending to deal with the economy? Are you denying these facts or just ignorant of them?
What revenues when? You talk in smoke and mirrors. Get your money back from your school, they burned you.It is hard for me to support something when you simply ignore what has been said.
Also revenues were decreasing. You keep making crap up and then denying facts that are inconvenient.
