Failures of Reaganomics

[P@triot]

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]

But you're wrong. Obama asked for and received THREE rounds of stimulus packages and each time he said "we just didn't spend enough". That's literally as stupid as a person standing in a bucket and saying that they just didn't pull hard enough to pull themselves up

Corporate profits are high right now because Dumbocrats drove jobs overseas and countries such as China and India are benefiting from those American jobs. Had Dumbocrats not drive those jobs overseas, American's would be benefitting from those jobs and we would be out of this mess.

 

[Billy000]

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]

But you're wrong. Obama asked for and received THREE rounds of stimulus packages and each time he said "we just didn't spend enough". That's literally as stupid as a person standing in a bucket and saying that they just didn't pull hard enough to pull themselves up

Corporate profits are high right now because Dumbocrats drove jobs overseas and countries such as China and India are benefiting from those American jobs. Had Dumbocrats not drive those jobs overseas, American's would be benefitting from those jobs and we would be out of this mess.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say in the first paragraph. Source? The stimulus created or saved 2.5 million jobs. The CBO, Moody, and JP Morgan all confirm this fact.

I am so sick of this blame democrats crap. Why don't you explain HOW democrats have anything to do with jobs going overseas? What the fuck are you talking about? Are corporate profits not the entire point? What is stopping them from setting up jobs here?

 

[S.J.]

History speaks for itself. Reagan was the best president of the 20th century, maybe beyond. And he's better than anyone we've had since, especially that muslim piece of shit we have now.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Left hates Reagan because he called them an Evil Empire, vowed to challenge and defeat them and caused the breakup of the USSR.

He freed hundreds of millions of people from the crushing oppression of Soviet Communism

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

The cause of the Soviet break up had more to do with it than just Reagan, by doing this you undermine the hard work many people died for in the 40 years of Soviet tyranny and the churches role in helping to throw off Soviet rule...In the Soviet Union itself the system collapsed upon itself because the West was able to out produce and outsmart the Soviets. Reagan did nothing compared to Gorbachev and his reforms....

What I dislike is how Reagan and Bush pushed for most favored nation position for China so we could open markets there. Even though 50 million Chinese lost their life to the communist during Mao's reign..

Look at the situation today, Russia is a small fraction of what the USSR was and thanks to our feckless leadership, they are causing trouble and using military might to take back what they lost thanks to Reagan.

Strong leader in the USA and the Soviet Leader reformed itself into nonexistence

Feckless leader in the USA and the Russia is reforging its old Empire

Reagan was the difference

 

[Sarah G]

Reaganomics has been dead and proven wrongheaded over and over. Trickle down not only doesn't work but the greed factor alone gave new meaning to the rich just keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

The land of opportunity died with Reaganomics.

 

[Sarah G]

History speaks for itself. Reagan was the best president of the 20th century, maybe beyond. And he's better than anyone we've had since, especially that muslim piece of shit we have now.

You must have been totally asleep during the Ronnie/Nancy era.

 

[Meathead]

Reaganomics has been dead and proven wrongheaded over and over. Trickle down not only doesn't work but the greed factor alone gave new meaning to the rich just keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

The land of opportunity died with Reaganomics.

There was a lot more opportunity with Reaganomics. Socialism leads people to poverty, which has been proven time and time again in place as diverse as Greece and China.

Until recently, the US had been fortunate to avoid that kind of stupidity.

 

[skookerasbil]

Im laughing.......this is a POLITICS forum. Accordingly.......reality is 95% perception. Reagan is a mythical figure in American culture. The k00k fringe left can disparage his legacy from now until the cows come home but it wont change shit!!

Soetero's legacy? The first black president.......that's it.

 

[GreenBean]

Reagonomics
Sound economic policies require time to take effect, there is no such thing as a magic pill that fixes the economy instatntaneously - I believe that Obamanomics have proven that - they are an obamanation.

Reagonomics took time to have its effects felt , Reagan Policies are responsible for the unprecedented prosperity sustained through much of the 80s - the administration of George the First and Slick WIlly the Cigar Peddler benefited from Reagonomics as neither President had much of an inkling as to what they were doing , in particlar the Cigar Man. At least George the First had many of Reagans People to guide him.

Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev are the reason there is no longer a Soviet Union, and the Eastern Bloc nations are now free, East Germans can enjoy the prosperity of their West German countrymen etc ... - Reagans Briiliant strategic Cold War tactics, bankrupted their military establishment.

 

[Camp]

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.

I am quite sure you're getting the hapless Carter mixed up with Reagan when it comes to impotency.

It is actually a bit ironic that some want to blame Reagan's policies for a economic collapse 20 years after he left office, but are pained to give him credit for the Soviet collaspe 3 years after his administration.

This bird has flown Camp, and we have had our chat about feeble whining, right?

Yes, we have had our feeble whining and I am familiar with the way a few whiners here react with economic arguments whenever the discussion about Reagan includes his weakness against terrorism that gave Hezbollah terrorist the power and confidence to use it continuously during his administration, all the way up to his departure, as a Christmas present sent in the form of blowing up and knocking down a jet full of American kids over Lockerbie.

 

[GreenBean]

Reaganomics has been dead and proven wrongheaded over and over. Trickle down not only doesn't work but the greed factor alone gave new meaning to the rich just keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

The land of opportunity died with Reaganomics.

There was a lot more opportunity with Reaganomics. Socialism leads people to poverty, which has been proven time and time again in place as diverse as Greece and China.

Until recently, the US had been fortunate to avoid that kind of stupidity.

Until Recently - the US had an American President. We now have a Kenyan Socialist Moslem President.

Stalinist Socialism - resulted in more mass murder than National Socialism, the Truth on that may never be known for sure.

Mao's regime still reigns supreme, and the crimes of Hitler pale in comparison to the absolute cultral and Human genocide perpetrated under the Chinese Communists.

Cambodia Pol Pot was but a flash in the pan , yet he killed a much higher percentage of his counttrymen than Hitler could ever boast. What do all these Tyrants, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot , Barack Obama have in common is that they were all Socialists

Ronald Reagan was their Polar Opposite

 

[Meathead]

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.

I am quite sure you're getting the hapless Carter mixed up with Reagan when it comes to impotency.

It is actually a bit ironic that some want to blame Reagan's policies for a economic collapse 20 years after he left office, but are pained to give him credit for the Soviet collaspe 3 years after his administration.

This bird has flown Camp, and we have had our chat about feeble whining, right?

Yes, we have had our feeble whining and I am familiar with the way a few whiners here react with economic arguments whenever the discussion about Reagan includes his weakness against terrorism that gave Hezbollah terrorist the power and confidence to use it continuously during his administration, all the way up to his departure, as a Christmas present sent in the form of blowing up and knocking down a jet full of American kids over Lockerbie.

Really, Hezbollah bombed that airline?! FFS, if you're going to whine feebly, you might at least get your facts straight.

Camp, whether you mean to or not, you're pissing in the wind and simply inflating the legacy of a historical giant.

 

[GreenBean]

Wow

 

[GreenBean]

History speaks for itself. Reagan was the best president of the 20th century, maybe beyond. And he's better than anyone we've had since, especially that muslim piece of shit we have now.

You must have been totally asleep during the Ronnie/Nancy era.

Wow Sarah , you really are one ignorant little gutter snipe aren't you ? You haven't got a clue as to what you're vomitting out , just some rancid feces you digested in the bowels of your Socio-Fascist classroom I guess .

 

[skookerasbil]

Make no mistake......Obama economic policies are trickle-up poverty driven and nothing more. That's the plan. When you expand the poor class into the middle class = power. Its simple politics. Anybody with the IQ of a small soap dish can figure it out. Its smart politics too by the way......even if you don't agree with it. At the core of course is destruction of the capitalistic system. Small business, which historically employs 70% of the people is collapsing under Obama with regulations and taxes.

Obama decimates ALL of his predecessors on one count: record regulations >>>

Regulator Without Peer - WSJ.com


Why do you think the economy is growing as it has in the past post-recession? THATS the plan!!


I'll give Obama this......he said he'd fundamentally change America and has delivered big time on that score. In that regard, the guy might be the most successful president in the history of the union and Im not even kidding.

 

[GreenBean]

Make no mistake......Obama economic policies are trickle-up poverty driven and nothing more. That's the plan. When you expand the poor class into the middle class = power. Its simple politics. Anybody with the IQ of a small soap dish can figure it out. Its smart politics too by the way......even if you don't agree with it. At the core of course is destruction of the capitalistic system. Small business, which historically employs 70% of the people is collapsing under Obama with regulations and taxes.

Obama decimates ALL of his predecessors on one count: record regulations >>>

Regulator Without Peer - WSJ.com


Why do you think the economy is growing as it has in the past post-recession? THATS the plan!!


I'll give Obama this......he said he'd fundamentally change America and has delivered big time on that score. In that regard, the guy might be the most successful president in the history of the union and Im not even kidding.

The Plan ... A segment of the The Plan was described a while back it's known as the Cloward-Piven Strategy it's deliberate economic sabatoge. Now I wouldn't go so far as to credit Barry O Bomber with enough intelligence to devise or implement this, he's just a figurehead - a small cog in a big machine.

The Cloward Piven strategy was outlined in 1966 by political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. It called for deliberately forcing the U.S. public welfare system into over-drive in order to precipitate a economic collapse that would finalize in replacing the welfare system with a socialist system devoid of a work ethic,....

The Cloward Piven Strategy

 

[Camp]

I am quite sure you're getting the hapless Carter mixed up with Reagan when it comes to impotency.

It is actually a bit ironic that some want to blame Reagan's policies for a economic collapse 20 years after he left office, but are pained to give him credit for the Soviet collaspe 3 years after his administration.

This bird has flown Camp, and we have had our chat about feeble whining, right?

Yes, we have had our feeble whining and I am familiar with the way a few whiners here react with economic arguments whenever the discussion about Reagan includes his weakness against terrorism that gave Hezbollah terrorist the power and confidence to use it continuously during his administration, all the way up to his departure, as a Christmas present sent in the form of blowing up and knocking down a jet full of American kids over Lockerbie.

Really, Hezbollah bombed that airline?! FFS, if you're going to whine feebly, you might at least get your facts straight.

Camp, whether you mean to or not, you're pissing in the wind and simply inflating the legacy of a historical giant.

I said it wrong, my mistake. Hezbollah attacked us continuously during the Reagan administration and that gave Momar the confidence to bomb the Disco in Germany. Reagan's half ass weak response of a one shot bombing of Libya that managed to kill Momar's daughter led to Momars decision to say Merry Christmas to Ronnie.

 

[natstew]

The Obama Regime is destroying the American Dollar by inflation.
Been to the supermarket lately?

 

[editec]

The middle class kept getting poorer through the Reagan Admin and all that have followed.

Oh the Median Family incomes might have continued to rise but their purchasing power fell and continues to fall every year.

 

[Iceweasel]

Reaganomics has been dead and proven wrongheaded over and over. Trickle down not only doesn't work but the greed factor alone gave new meaning to the rich just keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

The land of opportunity died with Reaganomics.

Can you back up any of that? The rich are getting richer now so your comments don't add up.

And yes, I was there, started a business in '85 that served other businesses. What were you doing?