Obama/Reagan -- a study...

[Iriemon]

I realize Reagan is a hero for most republicans, face it who else is there? Lincoln? But we have to be honest and for those of us who lived through Reagan, and saw the impact of his policies, it just wasn't good. Firing the air traffic controllers started business on the path to 'screw the employee only money matters' philosophy. Lowering taxes made us a debtor nation, and created the economic condition that caused Bush Sr to lose after one term. The changes in employee rights and deregulation lead us to today's mess. There is no way Reagan can be considered anything more than a actor who became president but continued to believe in make believe. Ironically those who praise him today suffer the same make believe.

CEPR - America Since 1980: A Right Turn Leading to a Dead End

Amazon.com: The United States since 1980 (The World Since 1980): Dean Baker: Books


""Reagan was coming from this very simple proposition: If you lower the tax rate, then more people will work, there will be more income in the economy and everyone's lives would be better. Despite a 25 percent income tax cut, by 1982 Reagan faced a deepening recession, mounting unemployment and homelessness.""

Ken Duberstein, Reagan Chief of Staff

I didn't agree with a lot of Reagan's policies, but I thought he was a good president, at least first term. He brought a cheery optimism and can-do spirit to an American that was in a mailaise from post Vietnam and economic problems including inflation. I agreed with him that the tax code in those days was ridiculous and needed simplification, which was accomplished in 1986.

Reagan's stregnth, lost on many conservatives, was that while he had certain beliefs, he was not an ideolouge. He believed tax cuts would spur the economy, but when revenues fell percipitously he raised taxes in a number of ways. He called the Soviet Union the "evil empire", but that didn't stop him from meeting their leader, shaking his hand, and working to improve relations between the countries. He had a numbe of faults, everyone does, but all in all he was a pretty good prez, IMO.

 

[MaggieMae]

Not deficient in Health care????? Health care does become the responsibility of the government when its become so deregulated it is unaffordable for everyday people!!! Do you know how much one nights stay in a hospital costs?? Approximately $5000 to $7000 where I live and thats probably cheap compared to the rest of the country....How many people have an extra $5000 laying around provided they don't have insurance which is unaffordable for individuals now also??....not many!!!

Public schools in this country are a joke also.... They can't find descent teachers because they don't make descent salaries!!!! And don't even get me started on universities!!!!....They're becoming as bad as health care!!! Tuition at my alma mater went up 21% in one year last year.... How is that not deficient??

Oh yea and energy.... We're still relying on energy created in early 1900s!!! Some of so-called pork you speak of is going to find new energy sources.... I think the country spoke up last election and we're tired of living in the stone age!!! Of course it will cost money to fix these things, but our children will be better off!!!

No.. it does not... government, nor other citizens, do not exist in order to provide for your personal care for you.. whether it costs $1 or $10000.... you are the only one responsible for you and your upkeep.. sorry

And on energy... you honestly think that we have had no improvement in technology form the early 1900's? Absolutely laughable... Fire was "created" in the stone age, yet you still cook with it... How barbaric

And government should PROMOTE advances in energy creation... it is not there to just pump taxpayer dollars into it... have incentives for companies to use their resources to research the next energy trends or to improve efficiency... damn straight.... but to throw a bunch of taxpayer money at it?? Nope.. sorry.. don't subscribe to that horse shit

Teacher salaries.... yep.. it's an issue... but as for universities.. when you're going to a university, you are a goddamn adult... meaning it is YOUR responsibility to pay for it or earn a scholarship or whatever else... public paid education for minors, all great... for adults, no freakin' way... and it is not the government's responsibility for tuition costs, nor is it responsible for subsidizing that cost for you... you want it, work a second job, save for a couple years til you can afford it, earn a scholarship, join the Army for the GI Bill, or whatever else... but that is on you, not the government

I agree with you that education is our responsibility!!!...I worked on a farm all my life and saved enough money to pay for what my scholarships didn't cover!!! But it's getting to the point where kids (adults) cannot afford it on what they make by second rate jobs you have while you're in college!!! I didn't say government should pay for it... I say they should regulate the costs to public universities!!! Oh yea and I work for the U.S. government... You wanna hear a complaint I hear EVERY SINGLE day??? Not enough educated young people!!!!!! Wonder why????

I also agree you should take care of yourself.... But not when our doctors and insurance companies are becoming as rich as they are on the expense of people who can't afford it!!! The amount of money they make is ridiculous!!!!!

Oh yea, and thank you for trying to belittle me by taking what I said about energy out of context!!!.... Considering I'm a rocket scientist, I probably don't know that much about energy, but thanks anyways!!!! Ummmm, what I meant was that the same technology created in the early 1900s is still BASICALLY the same technology we use today...It all still relies on the same principles it has become more efficient but not efficient enough and not even close to where it should be!!! Yes, the internal combustion engine was created in the early 1900s, guess what we're still using!!!!..... And you get between 45 to 60% efficiency out of them while polluting our air!!!! But hey, lets keep everything like it is and continue to let the middle class fail....Great Idea!!!

To sum up the debate over all 3 of those major issues, both Republicans and Democrats have had decades to improve upon them but have done nothing of any significance that could be considered "progress." Without a healthy citizenry, without an educated citizenry, we cannot begin to tackle the other major problems that are coming at us fast and furious these days. It's that simple.

 

[Maple]

Reagan was a real leader and a real President, Obama is a community organizer who lets Pelosi and Reid lead.

 

[Lycurgus]

It has been said that Obama studied the Reagan handbook and admired Reagans skill at governing---some would call it manipulating. hmmmm,


what did Reagan do? I say he got blue collar Dems and others to vote identity over self-interest. What is Obama doing...copying Reagan? I say yes, Obama is getting many a progressive and liberal and others to vote/go along with a sense of belonging---identity--- over self-interest.

Obama is much brighter than Reagan. Reagan was a figurehead, a script reader, very lazy and had no ideas. He was much more like your other party leader, Rush Limbaugh.

Obama is substantive, thoughtful, very smart, and has a lot of energy. He is his own man and unique so quit trying to take credit for him.

LOL yes Obama is his own man and will save us all.

Wake me up when it's over, please!

 

[driveby]

Oh yes. He was certainly a very nice man. Some Republicans really like to pretend that he is one of our greatest presidents and that is simply not true.

Obama could be, time will tell.

As stated.. you like to have your beliefs that have nothing to do with facts... you would rather have your hype and myth

Reagan hero worship is all about hype and myth.

You're right, Reagan just made a wreck of the country after the Carter administration left things in perfect condition.......

 

[Sarah G]

As stated.. you like to have your beliefs that have nothing to do with facts... you would rather have your hype and myth

Reagan hero worship is all about hype and myth.

You're right, Reagan just made a wreck of the country after the Carter administration left things in perfect condition.......

Were things left in good condition when Reagan left the WH? Hardly. He was watching old movies everyday while Nancy or George Herbert ran things. That is the scary truth about Reagan's last months in office.

 

[driveby]

Reagan hero worship is all about hype and myth.

You're right, Reagan just made a wreck of the country after the Carter administration left things in perfect condition.......

Were things left in good condition when Reagan left the WH? Hardly. He was watching old movies everyday while Nancy or George Herbert ran things. That is the scary truth about Reagan's last months in office.

Right again, and of course, Bush made it worse, then Clinton raised the country back out of the bowels of hell........

 

[Sarah G]

You're right, Reagan just made a wreck of the country after the Carter administration left things in perfect condition.......

Were things left in good condition when Reagan left the WH? Hardly. He was watching old movies everyday while Nancy or George Herbert ran things. That is the scary truth about Reagan's last months in office.

Right again, and of course, Bush made it worse, then Clinton raised the country back out of the bowels of hell........

Well, yeah.

 

[driveby]

Were things left in good condition when Reagan left the WH? Hardly. He was watching old movies everyday while Nancy or George Herbert ran things. That is the scary truth about Reagan's last months in office.

Right again, and of course, Bush made it worse, then Clinton raised the country back out of the bowels of hell........

Well, yeah.

Ahhh simple formula, all Republican presidents bad, all Democrat presidents sooper, got it, thanks......

 

[Sarah G]

Right again, and of course, Bush made it worse, then Clinton raised the country back out of the bowels of hell........

Well, yeah.

Ahhh simple formula, all Republican presidents bad, all Democrat presidents sooper, got it, thanks......

Well we do always seem to be cleaning up after their failed policies.

 

[driveby]

You seem to drink a lot of Kool Aid .......

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It is far too early to compare Obama to Reagan. Reagan's long list of accomplishment is fact - Obama has yet to record anything substantive beyond being our first half-black president. He might well do so, but as of yet, while his administration has been big on media promoted flash, there remains real work to either be done, or messed up...

Far too early? Really? I wrote that Obama has studied Reafan's playbook and that he appears to be copying it. The evidence I speak of is not to be found in his 100plus days of governing but in his election strategy (highly successful), and his hold over people's emotions and reason. People who voted for him are giving the honeymoon of a lifetime.

What Obama currently lacks is Reagan's natural self-assurance.

ypu are either hooked on a super bradnd of coolaid(lol) or suffering wing-nut blindness. Most rational opponents of Obama would admit to his sef-assurance.

Obama is trying very hard to fit into the suit of President of the United States, but you can see him working at it. With Reagan, it appeared effortless. This is likely due to the vast years of experience Reagan had over Obama when taking the job. Obama has very little governing experience, Reagan had a number of years as governor, and many more as a new voice of American conservatism prior to taking his presidential oath of office.

i agree with only half of your analysis. The other half is colred by your obvious ideological bent. sigh

While a common ploy for the intellectually disinterested to discredit Reagan as "unintelligent", the actual record, again, shows a far different reality. Reagan's more recently published book of letters shows a mind capable of grasping complex issues and devolving them into simple and powerful principle. This was one of his greatest strengths as a leader. Reagan contributed greatly to his speeches, often doing drastic revisions, or inserting a critical line that altered the entire scope of the dialogue.

Reagan may indeed have been wise, but the curiosity that comes with intelligence was lacking in most accounts of him at cabinet meetings. sorry...truth sucks. Reagan was a smart guy...smartness does not equal intelligence. Let us quibble over definitions some day, but not now.

Aram Bakshian Jr wrote of Reagan, "He was - God bless him, a very intelligent man rather than a not very bright intellectual. He had vision, instinct, and an innate sense of right and wrong, and he knew what could or could not be accomplished."

Reagan was almost the epitome of anti-intellectualism. [/quote] interesting read by Jr.: nationalreview.com/comment/bakshian
when speaking about Reagan in articles in 2002 and ..intellectual was not one of the qualitiues Jr. spoke of.

Therein one finds the point of contention with so many "intellectuals", those hordes of learned minds that know so very little. Reagan had a natural intelligence not based upon the self important posturing of the "bright intellectual" but that of an experienced and self- assured American man. In that sense, Reagan was what those bright intellectuals could never be - confident, and it annoyed them to no end, particularly those of the liberal slant.

natural intelligence is just code for...(fill in the blank. I spoke with people who know about Reagan from meings with House and Senate leaders...and they all said to a person that Reagan was frightengly allof and absent on in discussions pof substance. It wa ssaid Tip O'Neill (who liked RR immensly as a person) would ask Reagan about hollywood and movies in order to get Reagan to feel like he belonged in the meetings. sigh

Reagan's impact upon the modern American presidency is indisputable.

indisputable---yes....positive? hmmmmm?

He continues to rank among the top presidents of history, and among the top few of the 20th Century.

by whom exactly?

Obama would do well indeed to learn
from Reagan's example - though he might not be up to the task, as no other president since Reagan has been able to move so effortlessly yet effectively, within the confines of the job of President of the United.

So I say good luck to President Obama.

And I say once again, thank you to President Reagan...

I consider Reagan to be one of the worst Presidents of my lifetime. Obama has learned from studying more than just Reagan. You make some insightful comments but theeeeir mix with the adoration of wingnuttisms makes me think of you as a common boob.

have a nice day.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Reagan began the destruction of the middle class, and he started the militaristic hubris that lead to Iraq. For that and for his inept tax policies which made us a debtor nation, I rank him the worst president in modern times. Bush Jr was not possible without Reagan. Even S&L happened under his watch, the start and a key example of what happens when regulation is weakened and greed is the motivator.

Ronald Reagan's Legacy
Firedoglake » Newsflash: Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes (You Idiots)

thank you. For some here it just sucks to be presented with facts. .

 

[Sinatra]

It is a shame this thread has once again devolved into repeated political bashing myth. It is the great frustration of this medium that so few do so little to expand the understanding of their own history.

Please explore further the facts of the Reagan years - they were an undeniable success. Perfect? No, there is no political era where perfection was attained.

As to the specifics of the Reagan economy, it was the bottom income earners who saw the greatest growth in incomes under Reagan. Why do you think Reagan was able to score such a historically huge election victory in 1984? The middle class was thriving under Reagan - thus the emergence of the Reagan Democrats - middle class blue collar union members who bucked the voting request of their union leaders and supported Reagan at the ballot.

The bottom earners in America saw their inflation-adjusted incomes grow by 77% from the late 1970s to the mid 1980s.

The second lowest income bracket in America saw their incomes grow by 37% in the same time period.

The third lowest income bracket saw income growth of 20%.

What of the highest income bracket? Well, their income grew by just 5%.

The upward mobility of vast numbers of Americans during the 1980s was a testament to the Reagan economic record. Remove the constraints of government and allow citizens the opportunity for economic prosperity - and millions of Americans did just that - approximately 90% of working Americans moved into a higher income bracket from the start of the 1980s to the conclusion of the Reagan era.

As a point of comparison, is you take per person GDP figures of the Reagan era, we see a considerable annual growth of 3.2%. During the Clinton era - a time of economic prosperity as well, we see a far less impressive per person GDP growth rate of 2.3%. Solid, but far from spectacular. Job creation during the Reagan years was approximately 20 million. During the Clinton era, approximately 16 1/2 million. (Both good mind you - but the Reagan years were substantially better.)

Regarding tax policy, the media has made much over the fact that the top 1% of income earners in America saw their tax burden decrease by 30% under Reagan. This is quite true. What so often goes unreported is that the top 20% of income earners saw their tax burden decrease by 35%, and the middle and lowest income earners saw decreases of 64% and 264% respectively. (this was a result of Reagan raising the earned income credit by 300% and doubling the personal exemption rate)

As far as the issue of debt, it is simple fact that the national debt increased under Reagan, and the Democrat Congress. What is so often left out of the equation is that while defense spending increased 50% under Reagan, it was the far greater means tested entitlement spending increases of 102% that was the greatest contributor to the national debt. And it should be noted that at the conclusion of the Cold War, defense spending was then slashed by 15%, while non-security national spending continued to escalate. (And today - well, it has hit all time highs.) It was this 15% drop in defense spending that equated to the peace dividend enjoyed by Bush I and most notably, Clinton. Unfortunately, domestic spending soon outpaced the peace dividend gains, and then when combined with the ever greater spending of Bush II, well, we have now come to the Obama era which while quick to condemn Bush II's fiscal irresponsiblity, appears more than willing to take such irresponsibility even further...)

But getting back to Reagan, while federal revenues rose substantially as a result of his tax policies, so too did overall federal spending. A great deal of blame can be laid at the feet of the Democrat Congress, who repeatedly demanded increases in their proposed budgets if they were to include Reagan's requests for increased defense spending, each side willingly compromising for the furthering of their respective agendas.

That being said, the Reagan record must too be held accountable for these deficits, and history will note that accounting - though far more fairly and in proper historical context than the sadly slanted and misinformed anti-Reagan rants that a few in here ignorantly engage in.

So let the true record show that lower and middle class Americans - at least those choosing to take advantage of the opportunities presented them, thrived during the Reagan era, with nearly 90% substantially improving their incomes during Reagan's two terms.

Will Obama rise to the level of Reagan's success? Will he grow into the role of President so he can move with the same comfortable self-assurance and certainty of path that marked the Reagan years?

That remains to be seen. At present, like Reagan, Mr. Obama faces considerable economic challenges at the outset of his presidency. Unlike Reagan, Obama has chosen to expand the government as a means of growing opportunity. Reagan of course viewed government as a natural contradiction to individual opportunity.

History has proven Reagan right on his watch - it remains to be seen if history will be so kind to Obama on his.



"Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize it bears a very close resemblance to the first."

-Ronald Reagan

Even better the second time...

I am much amused at the Reagan detractors in here who so clearly know so little of this integral 20th Century American President...

 

[AllieBaba]

I do so yearn for the golden years of the Carter presidency...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

It has been said that Obama studied the Reagan handbook and admired Reagans skill at governing---some would call it manipulating. hmmmm,


what did Reagan do? I say he got blue collar Dems and others to vote identity over self-interest. What is Obama doing...copying Reagan? I say yes, Obama is getting many a progressive and liberal and others to vote/go along with a sense of belonging---identity--- over self-interest.

Obama is much brighter than Reagan. Reagan was a figurehead, a script reader, very lazy and had no ideas. He was much more like your other party leader, Rush Limbaugh.

Obama is substantive, thoughtful, very smart, and has a lot of energy. He is his own man and unique so quit trying to take credit for him.

Ignorance is just too easy to spot...

You're position is throughly VOID of anything resembling reality; proving that you have absolutely NO knowledge of Ronald Reagan or the world changing history he lead us through.

 

[DamnYankee]

I believe the most salient point in this little thread, is that the scope and import of the Reagan accomplishments are indisputable. He was, as one historian somewhat recently put it, "The last great gentleman president."

Whether or not Obama will rise to the level of accomplishment of Reagan remains to be seen - he is far unproven to this point to make such a call.

I agree. (Shocking, I know.) But I'm at least willing to see what unfolds over the next few years rather than persecuting Obama right out of the gate. He is a president more interested in domestic policy, which has taken a back seat to everything else for far too long. I'm uncomfortable about the amount of money it will take, but I remain optimistic about the results. Obama is attacking headlong the three critical areas where the U.S. is sadly deficient: Education, health care, energy. Even a new Republican president would need to address all three, and each will take putting fat in at the beginning to get up to speed.

While I would agree that "domestic policy" needs more attention than it has received of late (our infrastructure, for instance), could you please explain the disconnect between what Obama is doing, as he threatens to push his agenda through by any means possible, and what he has said? For example, he has said that he stood for a new way of doing business in Washington (change). Then, in an interview on CNN with Blitzer, he conceded that he would have to reorder his priorities, and did so in that interview.

Instead, what he's done, and is doing, we've been presented with an "all or nothing" stimulus package and, now, a budget. Were those reordered priorities just more Obama-speak? Words he didn't mean? I don't know about you, but most of us are forced to prioritize our "wish lists", and there's usually no magnanamous benefactor sitting on the sidelines to help make all our dreams come true.

 

[DamnYankee]

You're right, Reagan just made a wreck of the country after the Carter administration left things in perfect condition.......

Were things left in good condition when Reagan left the WH? Hardly. He was watching old movies everyday while Nancy or George Herbert ran things. That is the scary truth about Reagan's last months in office.

Right again, and of course, Bush made it worse, then Clinton raised the country back out of the bowels of hell........

[COLOR="DarkRed[I]"]<chuckle>[/I] Always interesting to ask how Clinton's health care proposal didn't make it out, considering he had the best shot at it in the history of Presidential attempts.[/COLOR]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I do so yearn for the golden years of the Carter presidency...

why they are just what Bush W. left us.

 

[Yukon]

Bonzo should have been given an Academy Award for his portrayal of a President. The man was intellectually inferior to even Bush Junior and that's saying something.