Failures of Reaganomics

[Soggy in NOLA]

What the hell is Reaganomics? Other than some made up BS like "trickle down"?

 

[Edgetho]

Those who praise Ronald Reagan as a good president rarely, if ever mention his numerous (and very serious) failures. Rarely do we hear from them any mention of immigration AMNESTY, Briggs Inititative, Iran-Contra, the Lebanon Marine barracks fiasco, or the worst job growth and GDP growths since 1950.

To boot, the combination of significant tax cuts and a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending 91981-1988) resulted in large budget deficits, an expansion in the U.S. trade deficit, as well as the stock market crash of 1987, while also contributing to the Savings and Loan crisis. The ultimate cost of the Savings and Loan crisis is estimated to have totaled around $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was consequently and directly subsidized by the U.S. government. John Kenneth Galbraith called it "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.

Trickle-Down Economics: Four Reasons Why It Just Doesn't Work | United for a Fair Economy

FDIC: The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography

John Kenneth Galbraith, The Culture of Contentment. (Houghton Mifflin, 1992).

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo4.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jun8.html

Ronald Reagan: The Presidential Portfolio: History as Told through the Collection of the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum: Lou Cannon: 9781891620843: Amazon.com: Books (see page 128)

No doubt about it. Trickle down economics is the biggest political lie ever told. 4.6 jobs per million dollar cut is all Bush has to show for. In fact, twice as many private jobs were created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8.

That would explain why there are 1 million fewer people working today than when the lying cocksucker in chief took office.

dimocraps lie. And you're a lying bitch

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National) Home Page

 

[Edgetho]

Real per-capita disposable income increased by 18% from 1982 to 1989, meaning the American standard of living increased by almost 20% in just seven years. The poverty rate declined every year from 1984 to 1989, dropping by one-sixth from its peak. The stock market more than tripled in value from 1980 to 1990, a larger increase than in any previous decade.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures

I think the point highlighted above, more than any other, is why liberals lie about the Reagan era. The parasites like protectionist and bikersailor don't want to have to provide for themselves. And their masters (Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc.) don't want people off of the government plantation because it ensures the power they crave.

No.

Dogs bark. Babies cry. Ducks quack. Bears shit in the woods, and

dimocraps lie.

They're pathological liars.

Not just a few. Not just the ideologues.

ALL of them.

They lie like you and I draw breath. It's an autonomic function to them.

Me? I have to think before I tell a lie. (I thwear to gosh, honey, I only had 3 beers... okay, maybe 4 )

dimocraps don't.

They have no morals, no character, no rules of behavior, no code of honor, no..... Nothing.

dimocraps lie.

I wouldn't ask one the time of day.

As you grow older and start to connect the dots, you'll see what I mean.

 

[g5000]

When Reagan took office, the United States of America was stuck in stagflation, the Democrats were a suicide cult, and the entire country was suffering from low self esteem. Watergate, Three Mile Island, double digit inflation, the Iran hostage crisis, oil price shocks, Carter telling us all to wear sweaters, and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan were causing the Left to prematurely ejaculate over communism as the winner over the West. Jane Fonda could not find enough Soviet cocks to suck, and the media could not find enough talking heads to whine and complain about how bad and evil America was.

Eight years later, the USSR was on the brink of collapse, America was kicking ass and taking names while experiencing an economic boom, and we were on top of the world. And we had the best military in the history of the Universe.

Like BikerSailor, I too served under Reagan and it was night and day between when he took office and when he left. The military environment radically improved from a bunch of demoralized stoners to a lean mean fighting machine. Desert Storm was a cakewalk precisely because of the changes implemented on Reagan's watch.


You people who trash talk Reagan are excreting sour grapes out of your asses.

 

[Edgetho]

Carter's FIRST act as moron in chief was to pardon approximately 30,000 draft-dodging cowards.



Most of whom are now apparatchiks in the dimocrap party.


Fuck him. And FUCK them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Carter's FIRST act as moron in chief was to pardon approximately 30,000 draft-dodging cowards.



Most of whom are now apparatchiks in the dimocrap party.


Fuck him. And FUCK them.

Carter did start some of truly awesome weapons systems

 

[Iceweasel]

Real per-capita disposable income increased by 18% from 1982 to 1989, meaning the American standard of living increased by almost 20% in just seven years. The poverty rate declined every year from 1984 to 1989, dropping by one-sixth from its peak. The stock market more than tripled in value from 1980 to 1990, a larger increase than in any previous decade.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures

Yeah, but he put a hurtin' on communism so none of that matters.

 

[Politico]

Reagan sucked as a president. Matter of fact, under his leadership, I actually feared for my life as a member of the U.S. military.

Why? Because there were more attacks on various U.S.O.'s while he was president than there were at any other time I served in the U.S. Navy.

Lots of people lionize Reagan, but he was a crappy president, and with the way the Tea Party is going, even Reagan (who they like to deify) couldn't be given the nod for president, because the far right has taken over the GOP.

So it's Reagan's fault!!

Depends on what "it" is.

It is the 30 year old delusion people are living in.

 

[Meathead]

Read 'em and weep. Recent YouGov/Economist poll of presidents since Teddy Roosevelt:

Great

Reagan 32%
FDR 31
JFK 30

Worst

Obama 37%
Bush II 32
Nixon 30

Puts this puppy to sleep.

New Poll: Reagan Ranked Greatest President Of Last Hundred Years; Guess Who’s the Biggest Failure?[97698]/0/

 

[MarcATL]

Those who praise Ronald Reagan as a good president rarely, if ever mention his numerous (and very serious) failures. Rarely do we hear from them any mention of immigration AMNESTY, Briggs Inititative, Iran-Contra, the Lebanon Marine barracks fiasco, or the worst job growth and GDP growths since 1950.

To boot, the combination of significant tax cuts and a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending 91981-1988) resulted in large budget deficits, an expansion in the U.S. trade deficit, as well as the stock market crash of 1987, while also contributing to the Savings and Loan crisis. The ultimate cost of the Savings and Loan crisis is estimated to have totaled around $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was consequently and directly subsidized by the U.S. government. John Kenneth Galbraith called it "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.

Trickle-Down Economics: Four Reasons Why It Just Doesn't Work | United for a Fair Economy

FDIC: The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography

John Kenneth Galbraith, The Culture of Contentment. (Houghton Mifflin, 1992).

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo4.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jun8.html

Ronald Reagan: The Presidential Portfolio: History as Told through the Collection of the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum: Lou Cannon: 9781891620843: Amazon.com: Books (see page 128)

It doesn't matter how much of a COLOSSAL FAILURE Reagan was, all that matters is that he made Republicans FEELGOOD...you see.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Those who praise Ronald Reagan as a good president rarely, if ever mention his numerous (and very serious) failures. Rarely do we hear from them any mention of immigration AMNESTY, Briggs Inititative, Iran-Contra, the Lebanon Marine barracks fiasco, or the worst job growth and GDP growths since 1950.

To boot, the combination of significant tax cuts and a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending 91981-1988) resulted in large budget deficits, an expansion in the U.S. trade deficit, as well as the stock market crash of 1987, while also contributing to the Savings and Loan crisis. The ultimate cost of the Savings and Loan crisis is estimated to have totaled around $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was consequently and directly subsidized by the U.S. government. John Kenneth Galbraith called it "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.

Trickle-Down Economics: Four Reasons Why It Just Doesn't Work | United for a Fair Economy

FDIC: The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography

John Kenneth Galbraith, The Culture of Contentment. (Houghton Mifflin, 1992).

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo4.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jun8.html

Ronald Reagan: The Presidential Portfolio: History as Told through the Collection of the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum: Lou Cannon: 9781891620843: Amazon.com: Books (see page 128)

It doesn't matter how much of a COLOSSAL FAILURE Reagan was, all that matters is that he made Republicans FEELGOOD...you see.

They're so bitter and frustrated in Hope N ChangeLand they're projecting their Obama feeling on us

 

[protectionist]

Those who praise Ronald Reagan as a good president rarely, if ever mention his numerous (and very serious) failures. Rarely do we hear from them any mention of immigration AMNESTY, Briggs Inititative, Iran-Contra, the Lebanon Marine barracks fiasco, or the worst job growth and GDP growths since 1950.

To boot, the combination of significant tax cuts and a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending 91981-1988) resulted in large budget deficits, an expansion in the U.S. trade deficit, as well as the stock market crash of 1987, while also contributing to the Savings and Loan crisis. The ultimate cost of the Savings and Loan crisis is estimated to have totaled around $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was consequently and directly subsidized by the U.S. government. John Kenneth Galbraith called it "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.

Trickle-Down Economics: Four Reasons Why It Just Doesn't Work | United for a Fair Economy

FDIC: The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography

John Kenneth Galbraith, The Culture of Contentment. (Houghton Mifflin, 1992).

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo4.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jun8.html

Ronald Reagan: The Presidential Portfolio: History as Told through the Collection of the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum: Lou Cannon: 9781891620843: Amazon.com: Books (see page 128)

No doubt about it. Trickle down economics is the biggest political lie ever told. 4.6 jobs per million dollar cut is all Bush has to show for. In fact, twice as many private jobs were created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8.

Many of the so-called "jobs created" during the spring/summer of 2004 were election year deceptive frauds. The Bushies fabricated lists of jobs created, to push they numbers up to 2 million just in time for the November election.

Some of the laughable excuses that passed for "jobs created" were nothing but construction workers returning to work after an unseasonably cold February, strikers returning back to work, and illegal aliens counted by the thousands. Gee, these all really helped unemployed Americans, didn't they ?

 

[protectionist]

Reagan was a giant in an age of midgets who ushered in an age of peace and prosperity unseen since Eisenhower. For many, he cannot be forgiven for his accomplishments. The British left has the same problem with Thatcher, both who have been out of office for well over two decades.

That is proof of tremendous legacies of success. Whining will make not a whit of difference.

Does 250 Marines killed in their barracks in Lebanon sound like "peace" to you ? Or how about these ? >>>

Reagan supported the regimes of brutal authoritarian dictators like Haiti's Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier and the Philippines' Ferdinand Marcos.

He supported the white supremacist government of South Africa in its efforts to suppress the country's growing anti-apartheid movement.

He funded and armed right-wing "death squads" that rampaged through El Salvador and Nicaragua, massacring leftist foes and innocent civilians alike.

He sent lethal weaponry to both the Islamic fundamentalist government of Iran and to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, at a time when Iran and Iraq were at war with each other. (And in the course of secretly sending arms to the Iranians, his administration broke the law and found itself engulfed in the greatest scandal of the Reagan Era.)

 

[protectionist]

Reagan was a giant in an age of midgets who ushered in an age of peace and prosperity unseen since Eisenhower. For many, he cannot be forgiven for his accomplishments. The British left has the same problem with Thatcher, both who have been out of office for well over two decades.

That is proof of tremendous legacies of success. Whining will make not a whit of difference.

Okay, can you provide links that prove your statements?

I'm guessing that you can't.

Please provide links.

Links? Hell, I was there. I watched the Soviet Union unravel. I saw the economy expand. I saw him stand up to domestic blackmailers like PATCO and international thugs like Qadaffi. I saw a revitalized America on the heels of Johnson/Nixon/Ford/Carter. In short, I saw America succeed while those who opposed it failed.

Now, if it was a link about the feeble whining of his hapless detractors you wanted, here you go:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/349937-failures-of-reaganomics.html

I wouldn't exactly call this "revitalized" (in the years during and right after Reagan's time in office)

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/cha...growth.png?s=gdp+cqoq&d1=19900101&d2=19911231

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/taxratesgrowth.jpg

http://rationalwiki.org/w/images/8/88/ReaganDebt.png

 

[protectionist]

Real per-capita disposable income increased by 18% from 1982 to 1989, meaning the American standard of living increased by almost 20% in just seven years. The poverty rate declined every year from 1984 to 1989, dropping by one-sixth from its peak. The stock market more than tripled in value from 1980 to 1990, a larger increase than in any previous decade.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures

I think the point highlighted above, more than any other, is why liberals lie about the Reagan era. The parasites like protectionist and bikersailor don't want to have to provide for themselves. And their masters (Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc.) don't want people off of the government plantation because it ensures the power they crave.

I provided for myself for 50 years, working and paying taxes + spent 5 years in the military, and completed 5 years of college.

As for your illustrious economics, it's all squashed in the links in the previous post >> # 34

 

[protectionist]

We really could use some of Reagan's failures right now.

Reagan did not start the Silicon Valley tech revolution, it started in the late '60's and finally flourished in the mid eighties with the mass production of word processors and computers....

Reagan was president from 1981–1989. Prior to that he served as the 33rd Governor of California (1967–1975). Ronnie, where are ya?!

Hiding out somewhere, while writing letters to Obama about how to give millions of illegal aliens AMNESTY.

 

[protectionist]

No doubt about it. Trickle down economics is the biggest political lie ever told. 4.6 jobs per million dollar cut is all Bush has to show for. In fact, twice as many private jobs were created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8.

It's amazing how liberals claim that "trickle down" is a "lie". It's literally like saying that the sun is a "lie". Or the world being round is a "lie". There has never been an economic system in world history (and there never will be) that doesn't operate off money at the top "trickling down".

Under communism, the elite (Castro, Stalin, etc.) feast in tremendous wealth and allow some to "trickle down" to the masses.

The difference with capitalism is that is creates a much larger elite and forces them to "trickle" wealth "down" as they need the human capital for their operations. Stalin and Castro forced people at the barrel of a gun, so they could decide to shut that "trickle" off at any moment they wanted.

It's a simple fact that in the history of the world, a person in poverty has never hired anyone. They never created a single job. They've never signed a single check.

I would challenge people like [MENTION=33739]Billy000[/MENTION] to show a single system in world history in which wealth did not "trickle" down from the top. Hell, I would challenge people like Billy000 here to even MAKE UP a system in their typical liberal-unicorn fairytale world where wealth does not "trickle" down. They can't do it. All they can do is piss and moan about the monumental success of the Reagan policies out of fear that someday the American people might wake up and stop letting these parasites mooch off of them.

Being old enough to remember the technology of PERCOLATE UP coffee pots, I will say that PERCOLATE UP Economics really works while "trickle down: is nothing more than a SCAM job. Put money into the pockets of the lower classes and they go out in the stores (AKA "the economy") and SPEND IT. ANd they spend it into their own local communities, as opposed to the super rich who spend very high %s of their money OUTSIDE THE US. Giving more money to the rich is like handing it over to immigrants who wire tens of Billions$$ per year to their home countries, depriving US businesses of those sales$$$.

 

[Billy000]

No doubt about it. Trickle down economics is the biggest political lie ever told. 4.6 jobs per million dollar cut is all Bush has to show for. In fact, twice as many private jobs were created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8.

It's amazing how liberals claim that "trickle down" is a "lie". It's literally like saying that the sun is a "lie". Or the world being round is a "lie". There has never been an economic system in world history (and there never will be) that doesn't operate off money at the top "trickling down".

Under communism, the elite (Castro, Stalin, etc.) feast in tremendous wealth and allow some to "trickle down" to the masses.

The difference with capitalism is that is creates a much larger elite and forces them to "trickle" wealth "down" as they need the human capital for their operations. Stalin and Castro forced people at the barrel of a gun, so they could decide to shut that "trickle" off at any moment they wanted.

It's a simple fact that in the history of the world, a person in poverty has never hired anyone. They never created a single job. They've never signed a single check.

I would challenge people like [MENTION=33739]Billy000[/MENTION] to show a single system in world history in which wealth did not "trickle" down from the top. Hell, I would challenge people like Billy000 here to even MAKE UP a system in their typical liberal-unicorn fairytale world where wealth does not "trickle" down. They can't do it. All they can do is piss and moan about the monumental success of the Reagan policies out of fear that someday the American people might wake up and stop letting these parasites mooch off of them.

You misunderstand. I am not saying capitalism doesn't work. I am not saying the wealthy do not create jobs. I am saying that when it comes to stimulating growth in this country's economic system, merely stimulating supply side is not ENOUGH. Stimulating supply side, while important, means dick if you do not stimulate demand. Tax cuts for the wealthy only help the wealthy if the lower classes see no growth. The middle class is vital to this economy. Bush did not understand this. Obama did.

Obama's stimulus package did stimulate growth. Why? Because it cut taxes for the MIDDLE class and it provided extra demand to the poor through the extension of unemployment benefits. Unemployed people who would otherwise would not be spending money were spending money because of the government
assistance. Why wasn't it not enough to fix our economic woes? Because it wasn't big enough. Had it been bigger like it was meant to be, we would be out of this mess. You can thank republicans for that.


How do I know I am right? Because corporate profits are at an all time high. If trickle down economics was the only answer to our economic problems, we would be out of this mess.

[MENTION=30955]Rottweiler[/MENTION]

 

[Listening]

Okay, can you provide links that prove your statements?

I'm guessing that you can't.

Please provide links.

Links? Hell, I was there. I watched the Soviet Union unravel. I saw the economy expand. I saw him stand up to domestic blackmailers like PATCO and international thugs like Qadaffi. I saw a revitalized America on the heels of Johnson/Nixon/Ford/Carter. In short, I saw America succeed while those who opposed it failed.

Now, if it was a link about the feeble whining of his hapless detractors you wanted, here you go:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/349937-failures-of-reaganomics.html

The Soviet Union was still standing when Reagan left office. It didn't collapse until three years after he left office. And Qadaffi kicked his ass. So did Hezbolla. Reagan made the USA look like push over punks. There was no peace during the Reagan era. American's were constantly being kidnapped, murdered and blown up by terrorist while at the same time he conducted a secret illegal war in Central America.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNTRFHaexGw]Iran Hostages Released on Day 444 - YouTube[/ame]

A real pushover.

 

[Listening]

Those who praise Ronald Reagan as a good president rarely, if ever mention his numerous (and very serious) failures. Rarely do we hear from them any mention of immigration AMNESTY, Briggs Inititative, Iran-Contra, the Lebanon Marine barracks fiasco, or the worst job growth and GDP growths since 1950.

To boot, the combination of significant tax cuts and a massive increase in Cold War related defense spending 91981-1988) resulted in large budget deficits, an expansion in the U.S. trade deficit, as well as the stock market crash of 1987, while also contributing to the Savings and Loan crisis. The ultimate cost of the Savings and Loan crisis is estimated to have totaled around $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was consequently and directly subsidized by the U.S. government. John Kenneth Galbraith called it "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.

Trickle-Down Economics: Four Reasons Why It Just Doesn't Work | United for a Fair Economy

FDIC: The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography

John Kenneth Galbraith, The Culture of Contentment. (Houghton Mifflin, 1992).

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo4.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jun8.html

Ronald Reagan: The Presidential Portfolio: History as Told through the Collection of the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum: Lou Cannon: 9781891620843: Amazon.com: Books (see page 128)

Reaganomics, a Success Story | The Brussels Journal

Our non-Belgian readers may be surprised that that the Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt recently spoke out in favor of Reaganomics in an interview with Flemish weekly Humo. He underlined some of the concepts introduced by Reaganomics, which are taken for granted today.

When I think of Reagan, I'm thinking of Reaganomics and the Laffer curve. (Enthusiastically Do you remember: a tax cut could create more revenues! Reagan is dead now, but several of his ideas are now self-evident. The Flemish government lowered the estate and gift taxes. Surprisingly, the government got more income.


Few Belgians have analyzed Reaganomics in such an exhaustive way as the retired financial consultant Willy De Wit from Antwerp. Today, he is a member of the Flemish independent think thank WorkForAll. Recently, he gave a lecture for “FACS” (Free Association for Civilization Studies), a Flemish libertarian think tank lead by Martin De Vlieghere. Loaded with facts and figures, De Wit proved that Reaganomics did deliver results and was a success story.