- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,439
- 24,106
- Thread starter
- #421
On the flip side, we can be 100% sure that the economy WOULD have been devasted if the banks were not given TARP funds. The Big 6 had the capability of taking down the entire world's economy, as it had already begun to show that effect with the crash of Lehman Brothers. The jury is still out on health care reform. Cutting taxes further at this delicate point in time would mean a decrease in billions from the Treasury which would simply add to the deficit. And those are simple F.A.C.T.S that you cannot seem to get through your thick skull.
I don't give a shit what Reagan did. Times were different then. Very, very different.
I quote myself. If we had had a Reagan style policy, we would be in a high growth recovery right now.
The 1981-1982 recession lasted 16 months, and then a real recovery began.
This one started in late 2007, and given the unemployment levels which are not resulting in net increases in the employed, it's difficult to claim that we ever really entered a recovery.
Reagan CUT Taxes in 1981 (Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA)) - the superior GDP growth was due to these.
Here's the Quarterly GDP Growth Rate
Q1 2008 -0.7%
Q2 2008 1.5%
Q3 2008 -2.7%
Q4 2008 -5.4%
Q1 2009 -6.4%
Q2 2009 -0.7%
Q3 2009 2.3%
Q4 2009 5.6%
Q1 2010 2.7%
Q2 2010 3.2% est
And here we have the 1981 Recession and recovery
Q3 1981 5.0%
Q4 1981 -4.9%
Q1 1982 -6.4%
Q3 1982 2.2%
Q4 1982 -1.5%
Q1 1983 0.3%
Q2 1983 5.1%
Q3 1983 9.3%
Q4 1983 8.1%
Not the differences in the last three quarters of each sequence. There is a material difference. Growth matters. Something Obama clearly doesn't understand how to encourage.