A comparison of the Reagan and Obama recoveries

[Iceweasel]

Obama has done a pretty good job at handling the worst financial meltdown since the 20's.

LOL

Over 18 trillion in debt and this retard calls it a good job!

A depression would have been far more costly both financially and socially... The collapse in the US GDP would have made the debt to GDP ratio look far worse than today.

But if you're worried about debt, Obama has over halved the deficit.

Something no GOP president has done in close to 100 years... Where were you when Bush and Regan were yanking it up?

Let's see, 18 plus trillion in debt hasn't happened? So all the obama spending is just to get us out of the Bush spending? Like I said...LOL.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't see how anyone can argue with this:

It shows that Reagans supply side theories did just what conservatives intended........destroy the middle class and provide a low wage workforce

How does a higher income translate to "destroying the working class?" If anything, It's Obama who is destroying the working class.

What higher income?

Reagan set in motion policies which degraded the ability of workers to negotiate, collectively bargain while shifting more of the tax burden to the middle class

Then conservatives gloat because future presidents must deal with the impact of Reaganomics

The higher incomes that the government documented, as opposed to the lower incomes caused by the Obama administration.

Lower incomes have been a byproduct of 30 years of Reaganomics.....just like Conservatives intended

Trickle down tuned out to be the wealthy keeping the money

Bush didn't believe in Reaganomics, and the Democrats have been in the White House for 14 of the last 30 years, so that claim is absurd.

 

[rightwinger]

It shows that Reagans supply side theories did just what conservatives intended........destroy the middle class and provide a low wage workforce

How does a higher income translate to "destroying the working class?" If anything, It's Obama who is destroying the working class.

What higher income?

Reagan set in motion policies which degraded the ability of workers to negotiate, collectively bargain while shifting more of the tax burden to the middle class

Then conservatives gloat because future presidents must deal with the impact of Reaganomics

The higher incomes that the government documented, as opposed to the lower incomes caused by the Obama administration.

Lower incomes have been a byproduct of 30 years of Reaganomics.....just like Conservatives intended

Trickle down tuned out to be the wealthy keeping the money

Bush didn't believe in Reaganomics, and the Democrats have been in the White House for 14 of the last 30 years, so that claim is absurd.

After 30 years the tax structures, deductions and labor policies installed during Reaganomics are still going strong

The middle class has paid the price

 

[bripat9643]

How does a higher income translate to "destroying the working class?" If anything, It's Obama who is destroying the working class.

What higher income?

Reagan set in motion policies which degraded the ability of workers to negotiate, collectively bargain while shifting more of the tax burden to the middle class

Then conservatives gloat because future presidents must deal with the impact of Reaganomics

The higher incomes that the government documented, as opposed to the lower incomes caused by the Obama administration.

Lower incomes have been a byproduct of 30 years of Reaganomics.....just like Conservatives intended

Trickle down tuned out to be the wealthy keeping the money

Bush didn't believe in Reaganomics, and the Democrats have been in the White House for 14 of the last 30 years, so that claim is absurd.

After 30 years the tax structures, deductions and labor policies installed during Reaganomics are still going strong

The middle class has paid the price

Hmmm, nope. We've raised taxes multiple times since then, and all the thousands of deductions have been restored. Reagan didn't change any labor laws. The NLRB is populated with Obama cronies.

Things should be humming right now, according to your theory.

 

[rightwinger]

What higher income?

Reagan set in motion policies which degraded the ability of workers to negotiate, collectively bargain while shifting more of the tax burden to the middle class

Then conservatives gloat because future presidents must deal with the impact of Reaganomics

The higher incomes that the government documented, as opposed to the lower incomes caused by the Obama administration.

Lower incomes have been a byproduct of 30 years of Reaganomics.....just like Conservatives intended

Trickle down tuned out to be the wealthy keeping the money

Bush didn't believe in Reaganomics, and the Democrats have been in the White House for 14 of the last 30 years, so that claim is absurd.

After 30 years the tax structures, deductions and labor policies installed during Reaganomics are still going strong

The middle class has paid the price

Hmmm, nope. We've raised taxes multiple times since then, and all the thousands of deductions have been restored. Reagan didn't change any labor laws. The NLRB is populated with Obama cronies.

Things should be humming right now, according to your theory.

 

[healthmyths]

I don't see how anyone can argue with this:

Can you argue with the fact that W left the country in the worse economic condition since the Great Depression? No, I guess you can't. Administrations for decades to come will be paying for the incompetence of the recovering alcoholic.

Anyone can argue with that because it's pure lies. The Great Depression was caused by precisely the kind of policies that numskulls like you support. Obama didn't avoid it. He pushed us closer to it. That's why the economy sucks so bad right now.

We will be paying for the incompetence of Obama administration for decades.

Let's se....who was President when the country was driven into the Great Depression. Oh! That would be Herbert Hoover....a Republican! And who was President when the country was driven into the Great Recession? Oh! That would be George W Bush....a Republican.

Is this a coincidence or is it a trend. I argue that it is the latter. And now the Republicans want another chance at screwing over the economy.....REALLY?

FDR us out of the Great Depression and Obama is bringing us out of the Great Recession.

So....VOTE REPUBLICAN IN 2016 AND MAKE SURE THE COUNTRY:

-Invades the wrong country again
-Begins another dive into the abyss known as Republican austerity

Every time some LIP like you makes a statement like GWB pushed into Great Recession... EVERY TIME I will publish
these 4 major EVENTS that have NEVER occurred in ANY administration and the chances of all 4 cataclysmic events
occurring again... are small...
REMEMBER THESE events and maybe just maybe you will comprehend what happened!

Recession
1) Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Source: USATODAY.com - It s official 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss
2) Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in losses?
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble How to lose 5 trillion Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
3)Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: The Top 10 Financial Events of the Decade
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

4) $1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of
a) 400,000 jobs due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

And as far as spending like a drunken sailor....???

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

And for what you really ignorant LIPs totally seem to be unaware of TARP turning a profit???

Bailout Scorecard Eye on the Bailout ProPublica
TARP made a $55.1 Billion profit!

 

[mudwhistle]

given how stupid their base is isn't that a given?

it does help the Right appeal to ignorance of our supreme laws of the land in favor of morals from the Age of Iron.

This isn't a lib echo-chamber. This is reality. It's clear that our kids are being taught in school to be bigots. You just proved it. All you have to say is that your enemies are conservatives. Not cop-killers or terrorists.....conservatives.


Under Obama the rich got richer and more of us qualified as being poor. That didn't happen because of Capitalism......but because of corruption in government. Massive overregulation, 3 rounds of Quantitative Easing devalued the dollar, massive tax increases and deficit-spending. Add to that the lack of productivity, huge trade deficits, unemployment, lowering labor participation along with massive increases in entitlement spending. We have a government that it broken and can't be trusted. Yet you sneer at Republicans as if they caused it all. Who is the supposed leader of this mess????

 

[danielpalos]

When I get on threads like this, my sense of superiority becomes over-inflated. It comes from arguing with lightweights.

how difficult can it be when you Only appeal to ignorance and diversion.

Please! Not my fault if you think poverty and poor have different roots. I don't blame you personally, but American public education has a lot to answer for.

only poor is relative; poverty is defined in the US with the full faith and credit of public Acts.

 

[danielpalos]

I don't see how anyone can argue with this:

It seems like proof positive, that supply side economics merely means, bailout the wealthiest and then let it trickle down To The Right.

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%.

From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20]

Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21]

However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%.

The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21]

During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.

-- Source: Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Did you not want to address the OP?

i did; it is just a form of class warfare; only that can explain why the right doesn't seem to have any problem with their Ivy League MBA almost single handedly overturning a capital based maxim that claims, it takes money to make money money.

 

[danielpalos]

given how stupid their base is isn't that a given?

it does help the Right appeal to ignorance of our supreme laws of the land in favor of morals from the Age of Iron.

This isn't a lib echo-chamber. This is reality. It's clear that our kids are being taught in school to be bigots. You just proved it. All you have to say is that your enemies are conservatives. Not cop-killers or terrorists.....conservatives.


Under Obama the rich got richer and more of us qualified as being poor. That didn't happen because of Capitalism......but because of corruption in government. Massive overregulation, 3 rounds of Quantitative Easing devalued the dollar, massive tax increases and deficit-spending. Add to that the lack of productivity, huge trade deficits, unemployment, lowering labor participation along with massive increases in entitlement spending. We have a government that it broken and can't be trusted. Yet you sneer at Republicans as if they caused it all. Who is the supposed leader of this mess????

yes, Only the conservative and religious Right can be infidel, protestant, and renegade to any god.

 

[rightwinger]

 

[bripat9643]

The higher incomes that the government documented, as opposed to the lower incomes caused by the Obama administration.

Lower incomes have been a byproduct of 30 years of Reaganomics.....just like Conservatives intended

Trickle down tuned out to be the wealthy keeping the money

Bush didn't believe in Reaganomics, and the Democrats have been in the White House for 14 of the last 30 years, so that claim is absurd.

After 30 years the tax structures, deductions and labor policies installed during Reaganomics are still going strong

The middle class has paid the price

Hmmm, nope. We've raised taxes multiple times since then, and all the thousands of deductions have been restored. Reagan didn't change any labor laws. The NLRB is populated with Obama cronies.

Things should be humming right now, according to your theory.

Your chart is wrong. It shows the top marginal rate to be 36%. The top marginal rate is actually 40%. It hasn't decreased since the Clinton Administration.

If you think marginal rates are ever going back to 91%, you are delusional.

Yeah, that will bring back the golden age. <sarcasm>

 

[bripat9643]

 

[bripat9643]

 

[Iceweasel]

These guys don't care about facts. They simply get in the way.

 

[bripat9643]

These guys don't care about facts. They simply get in the way.

I predict RightWinger will go strangely silent in response to my recent posts.

 

[rightwinger]

These guys don't care about facts. They simply get in the way.

I predict RightWinger will go strangely silent in response to my recent posts.

Other than you have no clue as to what they mean?

 

[bripat9643]

These guys don't care about facts. They simply get in the way.

I predict RightWinger will go strangely silent in response to my recent posts.

Other than you have no clue as to what they mean?

Even a liberal moron like you can see what they mean. That's what makes you so upset.

Obama is a disaster. That's what they mean.