The Myths of Reaganomics

[The Rabbi]

Hmm, Reagan ushered in the longest peace time expansion in history. Clinton ushered in 9/11 and a recession that Bush ended quickly.
Bush ushered in the second longest peace time expansion. Obama has the longest recession since the war on his record.
Tell me which side is wrong again?
Rothbard is a narco libertarian so suspect right off. It is easy to give prescriptions from the ivory tower. In real life politics doesn't work that way.

 

[edthecynic]

Hmm, Reagan ushered in the longest peace time expansion in history. Clinton ushered in 9/11 and a recession that Bush ended quickly.
Bush ushered in the second longest peace time expansion. Obama has the longest recession since the war on his record.
Tell me which side is wrong again?
Rothbard is a narco libertarian so suspect right off. It is easy to give prescriptions from the ivory tower. In real life politics doesn't work that way.

A perfect example of CON$ervoFascist revisionist "history."

9/11 Reagan's "freedom fighter" OBL attacks America during Bush's term and it's Clinton's fault. Reagan cuts taxes in 1981 and gives us the 1982 1983 Reagan recession, at the time the worst since the Great Depression and it's Carter's fault. Clinton hands Bush a surplus that Bush quickly turns it into a recession and the Bush recession is Clinton's fault. Bush follows his 2001 recession with the 2007 Bush Depression and that is Carter's and Clinton's fault until Obama is elected and then becomes Obama's fault. Then the CON$ whine and cry like babies if anyone blames Bush for his mess.

 

[Flaylo]

Hmm, Reagan ushered in the longest peace time expansion in history. Clinton ushered in 9/11 and a recession that Bush ended quickly.
Bush ushered in the second longest peace time expansion. Obama has the longest recession since the war on his record.
Tell me which side is wrong again?
Rothbard is a narco libertarian so suspect right off. It is easy to give prescriptions from the ivory tower. In real life politics doesn't work that way.

Somebody here is having a problem with honesty. Go back and check the facts and quit fucking lying your ass off.

 

[editec]

Poeple speak about Regan as a tax cutter.

Now go check out how much the social security tax and medicade tax went up during his reign.

Still think he CUT taxes?

Well he did if you're a wealthy person, but if you're a working stiff he did EXACTLY the opposite of cutting YOUR taxes.

Of course, in his defence, had he NOT increased SS taxes, that system would be bankrupted.

My complaint therefore, isn't that he increase dSS taxes, but instead that he decreased Income taxes on the already wealthy enough.

Not that I hate the already wealthy enough, merely that by decreasing their taxes he drastically set us up for the increase in national debts.

And as many of you so correctly point out, it is CONGRESS who writes the laws that spend too much money.

And here's a clue for you OBAMAhaters.

The exact same thing can be said for Obama.

He can PROPOSE but it takes CONGRESS to dispose.

Since the Big 0 only works well when he has an enemy to fight, we need to have a Conservative dominated Congress. In that way, he could veto every single bill and the spending would stop.

The military would dissolve, law enforcement would collapse, rioting in the streets would tear apart the country. The rule of law would be a vaguely remembered legend as the books were burned and the internet collapsed.

Private industry would relocate entirely to other countries and we would all be penniless and destitute in perfect equality.

The Democrat ideal realized.

You want to get into a partisan pissing match, amigo, you've got the wrong partner.

A pox on both your houses.

 

[Truthmatters]

Hmm, Reagan ushered in the longest peace time expansion in history. Clinton ushered in 9/11 and a recession that Bush ended quickly.
Bush ushered in the second longest peace time expansion. Obama has the longest recession since the war on his record.
Tell me which side is wrong again?
Rothbard is a narco libertarian so suspect right off. It is easy to give prescriptions from the ivory tower. In real life politics doesn't work that way.

How much does Rove pay you to type lies all day long?

 

[Oddball]

Since the Big 0 only works well when he has an enemy to fight, we need to have a Conservative dominated Congress. In that way, he could veto every single bill and the spending would stop.

The military would dissolve, law enforcement would collapse, rioting in the streets would tear apart the country. The rule of law would be a vaguely remembered legend as the books were burned and the internet collapsed.

Private industry would relocate entirely to other countries and we would all be penniless and destitute in perfect equality.

The Democrat ideal realized.

Wow...So many negative waves, man.

Who says that collapsing law enforcement would automatically lead to rioting in the streets?

Hell, I don't think I've ever seen more cops per square mile than the area adjacent to the Staples Center, and you see all the good that did last week.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hmm, Reagan ushered in the longest peace time expansion in history. Clinton ushered in 9/11 and a recession that Bush ended quickly.
Bush ushered in the second longest peace time expansion. Obama has the longest recession since the war on his record.
Tell me which side is wrong again?
Rothbard is a narco libertarian so suspect right off. It is easy to give prescriptions from the ivory tower. In real life politics doesn't work that way.

Somebody here is having a problem with honesty. Go back and check the facts and quit fucking lying your ass off.

Yeah, that somebody is you.
Did we not experience the longest post war expansion during and after Reagan's term?
Check
Did Obama not begin his attacks on this country during CLinton's term, and did he not state that Clinton's actions in Somalia convinced him he would be succesful?
Check
Did the recession not start with the dot com bubble bursting, which is dated to the end of the Clinton administration?
Check.
Accusing someone telling the truth of lying is a lot easier than providing evidence.
Massive fail on your part, pansy.

 

[Greenbeard]

Did we not experience the longest post war expansion during and after Reagan's term?
Check

Just to be clear: you're starting the clock after the 1990-1991 recession?

Did Obama not begin his attacks on this country during CLinton's term, and did he not state that Clinton's actions in Somalia convinced him he would be succesful?

I get it--the president's last name is similar to a terrorist's first name. Stay classy.

 

[The Rabbi]

Did we not experience the longest post war expansion during and after Reagan's term?
Check

Just to be clear: you're starting the clock after the 1990-1991 recession?

Did Obama not begin his attacks on this country during CLinton's term, and did he not state that Clinton's actions in Somalia convinced him he would be succesful?

I get it--the president's last name is similar to a terrorist's first name. Stay classy.

No, I am starting it from 1982.
My bad. I meant Osama. But really is there a difference?

 

[code1211]

Now check the deficits of the Big 0. Either year of his failed pesidency amount to a greater total than all 8 years of Reagan. And what to show for it? Everything is worse.

Obama must be spending twice--maybe thrice!--what Reagan was as a percentage of GDP.

Oh. I guess it's maybe 1.5% of GDP more than Reagan was spending during the 1982 recession (and about 2-3% of GDP higher than Reagan's average over the decade). It looks like receipts have just fallen sharply and automatic stabilizers are at record high levels because we're in the deepest recession since the '30s.

I'm not sure what your point is. Reagan's biggest deficit was about 150 Billion with a B. When he took office, inflation was runaway, unemployment was runaway and the economy was stagnant. The only national success we had seen in the previous 4 years was the Olympic hockey team.

The Big 0's deficit this year will top 1.5 Trillion with a T. When he took office, the situation was bad and he is making it worse on a daily basis.

Reagan was working with a hostile Congress and the Big 0 has everyone on his side. He could get anything passed that he wanted. Witness the Health Insurance reform. Despite this, he cannot do anything about the economy BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. Gitmo, Iraq and Afghanistan don't look like he's had any epiphanies either.

For the love of God, he's still blaming Bush. I would love it if he could point at his successful solutions instead of his excuses. I suppose one points at what one has to point at.

Bush was no genius and was no wizard, but he was genuine and he did what he said he would do. He apparently had some pretty good ideas since the Big 0 is still using most of them. He's even pulled up Bush's General to replace the one that he hand picked.

 

[code1211]

Todays Republicans hold Ronald Reagan and his economic policies up as some kind of blueprint for fiscal responsibility for reducing deficits and and reducing the role of government, well see the facts for yourselves.

The Myths of Reaganomics - Murray N. Rothbard - Mises Daily


Why don't the Republicans let Reaganomics just dieinstead of trying to revive it?

Layig aside for the sake of your bias the facts that the country was on the same trajectory then that it is now and that Reaganomics changed that trajectory and set the stage for the 90's boom, let's check the numbers.

Federal Deficit and Debt (Nominal dollars, in millions)1
Debt as a percentage
Year Deficit Debt of that year's GDP
1979 -$40,183 -$828,923 34%
1980 -73,835 -908,503 34
1981 -78,976 -994,298 34
1982 -127,989 -1,136,798 36
1983 -207,818 -1,371,164 41
1984 -185,388 -1,564,110 42
1985 -212,334 -1,816,974 46
1986 -221,245 -2,120,082 50
1987 -149,769 -2,345,578 53
1988 -155,187 -2,600,760 54
1989 -152,481 -2,867,538 55
1990 -221,384 -3,206,207 59
1991 -269,521 -3,598,303 63
1992 -290,403 -4,001,941 67


Now check the deficits of the Big 0. Either year of his failed pesidency amount to a greater total than all 8 years of Reagan. And what to show for it? Everything is worse.

The country divides into two groups: Those who remember what the Carter years felt like and those who will find out.

Cherry pick dates? Now post the results under Clinton's watch, and follow up with those of G W Bush. Spin the numbers anyway you please, the fact remains Reagan & Bush II were both fiscally irresponsible.
Did the Congress pass the budgets? Yep; but Reagan & Bush II signed them. If the GOP cared about deficit spending, it's never been apparent nor can it be proved with statistics. The fact is our government continues to spend beyond our means. Unless revenue is increased, or spending reduced, we are headed for disaster.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House from 2001 until 2007. That is a fact. Our economy went to hell during that period of our history. Another fact.
To much is going to the few; to little is going to the many - this is not healthy. Anyone who has read history understands - maybe this is why Texas chose to rewrite history in their purchase of secondary education text books. But I digress. It is now time for the hue and cry of "Commie, he's only interested in the redistribution of the wealth!".
Let the fools rush in...

The table was taken whole from the site i visited. The topic was Reagan and I took the whole table despit the fact that it included dates before and after.

Tom Daschle was the Senate Majority leader from 2001 to 2003.

Speaking of Cherry Picking Dates, who controlled Congress during the Boom Years in the 90's? I seem to remember Newt and Bob Dole on allot of talk shows on Sunday Mornings.

 

[Douger]

535
equals
666

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7o9p0fP6cQ&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[Truthmatters]

Layig aside for the sake of your bias the facts that the country was on the same trajectory then that it is now and that Reaganomics changed that trajectory and set the stage for the 90's boom, let's check the numbers.

Federal Deficit and Debt (Nominal dollars, in millions)1
Debt as a percentage
Year Deficit Debt of that year's GDP
1979 -$40,183 -$828,923 34%
1980 -73,835 -908,503 34
1981 -78,976 -994,298 34
1982 -127,989 -1,136,798 36
1983 -207,818 -1,371,164 41
1984 -185,388 -1,564,110 42
1985 -212,334 -1,816,974 46
1986 -221,245 -2,120,082 50
1987 -149,769 -2,345,578 53
1988 -155,187 -2,600,760 54
1989 -152,481 -2,867,538 55
1990 -221,384 -3,206,207 59
1991 -269,521 -3,598,303 63
1992 -290,403 -4,001,941 67


Now check the deficits of the Big 0. Either year of his failed pesidency amount to a greater total than all 8 years of Reagan. And what to show for it? Everything is worse.

The country divides into two groups: Those who remember what the Carter years felt like and those who will find out.

Cherry pick dates? Now post the results under Clinton's watch, and follow up with those of G W Bush. Spin the numbers anyway you please, the fact remains Reagan & Bush II were both fiscally irresponsible.
Did the Congress pass the budgets? Yep; but Reagan & Bush II signed them. If the GOP cared about deficit spending, it's never been apparent nor can it be proved with statistics. The fact is our government continues to spend beyond our means. Unless revenue is increased, or spending reduced, we are headed for disaster.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House from 2001 until 2007. That is a fact. Our economy went to hell during that period of our history. Another fact.
To much is going to the few; to little is going to the many - this is not healthy. Anyone who has read history understands - maybe this is why Texas chose to rewrite history in their purchase of secondary education text books. But I digress. It is now time for the hue and cry of "Commie, he's only interested in the redistribution of the wealth!".
Let the fools rush in...

The table was taken whole from the site i visited. The topic was Reagan and I took the whole table despit the fact that it included dates before and after.

Tom Daschle was the Senate Majority leader from 2001 to 2003.

Speaking of Cherry Picking Dates, who controlled Congress during the Boom Years in the 90's? I seem to remember Newt and Bob Dole on allot of talk shows on Sunday Mornings.

And the CBO credits the 1993 budget reduction act with the majority of the surpluses we saw in the 1990s. Not one republica n vote was cast for it.

 

[Greenbeard]

I'm not sure what your point is.

My point is that it sounds like you're implying Obama is spending radically more than his predecessors when that's simply not the case. Discretionary spending is up but not quite as substantially as you might think. The deficits are so high in large part because tax receipts have plummeted, mostly due to the recession.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm not sure what your point is.

My point is that it sounds like you're implying Obama is spending radically more than his predecessors when that's simply not the case. Discretionary spending is up but not quite as substantially as you might think. The deficits are so high in large part because tax receipts have plummeted, mostly due to the recession.

Yeah, trillion dollar deficits...EVERYONE did that! Pffft!

The economy sucks thanks to Democrats

 

[edthecynic]

Layig aside for the sake of your bias the facts that the country was on the same trajectory then that it is now and that Reaganomics changed that trajectory and set the stage for the 90's boom, let's check the numbers.

Federal Deficit and Debt (Nominal dollars, in millions)1
Debt as a percentage
Year Deficit Debt of that year's GDP
1979 -$40,183 -$828,923 34%
1980 -73,835 -908,503 34
1981 -78,976 -994,298 34
1982 -127,989 -1,136,798 36
1983 -207,818 -1,371,164 41
1984 -185,388 -1,564,110 42
1985 -212,334 -1,816,974 46
1986 -221,245 -2,120,082 50
1987 -149,769 -2,345,578 53
1988 -155,187 -2,600,760 54
1989 -152,481 -2,867,538 55
1990 -221,384 -3,206,207 59
1991 -269,521 -3,598,303 63
1992 -290,403 -4,001,941 67


Now check the deficits of the Big 0. Either year of his failed pesidency amount to a greater total than all 8 years of Reagan. And what to show for it? Everything is worse.

The country divides into two groups: Those who remember what the Carter years felt like and those who will find out.

Cherry pick dates? Now post the results under Clinton's watch, and follow up with those of G W Bush. Spin the numbers anyway you please, the fact remains Reagan & Bush II were both fiscally irresponsible.
Did the Congress pass the budgets? Yep; but Reagan & Bush II signed them. If the GOP cared about deficit spending, it's never been apparent nor can it be proved with statistics. The fact is our government continues to spend beyond our means. Unless revenue is increased, or spending reduced, we are headed for disaster.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House from 2001 until 2007. That is a fact. Our economy went to hell during that period of our history. Another fact.
To much is going to the few; to little is going to the many - this is not healthy. Anyone who has read history understands - maybe this is why Texas chose to rewrite history in their purchase of secondary education text books. But I digress. It is now time for the hue and cry of "Commie, he's only interested in the redistribution of the wealth!".
Let the fools rush in...

The table was taken whole from the site i visited. The topic was Reagan and I took the whole table despit the fact that it included dates before and after.

Tom Daschle was the Senate Majority leader from 2001 to 2003.

Speaking of Cherry Picking Dates, who controlled Congress during the Boom Years in the 90's? I seem to remember Newt and Bob Dole on allot of talk shows on Sunday Mornings.

So you now admit that the Tech Bubble was the result of GOP policies.
Thank You!

 

[edthecynic]

When he took office, inflation was runaway, unemployment was runaway and the economy was stagnant.

More Crapola!

When Reagan took office UE was steady at only about 7.6%. UE never exceeded 7.8%, the UE rate Ford left during Carter's term. Reagan then cut taxes in August 1981 and UE skyrocketed to a high of 10.8% Nov and Dec of 1982, with 10 consecutive months of double digit UE. As a result, Reagan then raised taxes 8 times in 6 years and the economy recovered.

So Obama is doing way better than St Ronnie so far!!!
That drives you CON$ crazy, doesn't it!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Another article by a writer suffering the delusion that Reagan ran Congress.

Also, what we bought with the deficits from the military build-up was the collapse of the Democrat hometeam: the USSR.

Finally, Reagan deficit were peanuts compared to what Democrats are doing today, and all we have to show for it is creeping Fascism as the Democrat National Socialist Federal Gubbamint gobbles down one whole industry after another.

The Soviet Union collapsed under its own unsustainable economic system. It had nothing to do with the U.S. going into debt.

 

[Tom Clancy]

They don t want facts they want lies to keep them believing what their mommy and daddy told the US was when they were twelve.


They cheer and asshole who started wars and never paid for them and then crashed the entire world economy with their handing of the system to big business.

Lets remember the Cheney fuck and suck plan of energy management. He let the energy barons write our energy laws and then hired inspectors to fuck and suck their lobbiest.


The result was mine and oil rig disastors that KILLED American workers so the Barons could save a fucking dime.


There Hero Bush crashed this world economy and left the biggest fucking mess in decades and then topped it off with the biggest man made ecological disastor we have ever seen.

So what do the cons do with all this information? They pretend Obama is spending for NO FUCKING REASON.

Every con is a lying piece of shit or delusional.

Facts dont mean a damned thing to them.

And I'm guessing your the House of Truth?

Oh, enlighten me oh wise one!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Another article by a writer suffering the delusion that Reagan ran Congress.

Also, what we bought with the deficits from the military build-up was the collapse of the Democrat hometeam: the USSR.

Finally, Reagan deficit were peanuts compared to what Democrats are doing today, and all we have to show for it is creeping Fascism as the Democrat National Socialist Federal Gubbamint gobbles down one whole industry after another.

The Soviet Union collapsed under its own unsustainable economic system. It had nothing to do with the U.S. going into debt.

Sure it did. Sure it did.

Reagan just happened to be there at the time and coincidentally promised to send them to the ash heap of history at the same exact time as Gobry realized he should disband.

Fucking Tool.