Much Of What You've Heard About Carter And Reagan Is Wrong

[skews13]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

 

[Manonthestreet]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

Now do Trump

 

[ColonelAngus]

Cult fucks love to rewrite history.

If you listened to cult fucks, you would think the USA is the only nation on earth that has slavery in their past, when the reality is that EVERY SINGLE NATION ON EARTH HAS SLAVERY IN THEIR PAST.

Here is just another bullshit narrative.

Carter was awful, other than not starting a war.

Trump didnt start a war either.

 

[Silent Warrior]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

Sorry, but your explanation is totally erroneous.

 

[ColonelAngus]

year. Inflation rate Federal funds rate

1976	4.9%	4.75%
1977	6.7%	6.50%
1978	9.0%	10.00%
1979	13.3%	12.00%
1980	12.5%	18.00%	Recession
1981	8.9%	12.00%	Reagan tax cut
1982	3.8%	8.50%	Recession ended
1983	3.8%	9.25%
1984	3.9%	8.25%
1985	3.8%	7.75%
1986	1.1%	6.00%

These Numbers do not lie. Carter was trash.

He was inaugurated January 20, 1977 and served until January 20th 1981.

LOOK AT HIS NUMBERS.

LOOK HOW THE REAGAN TAX CUTS LOWERED INFLATION.

 

[JWBooth]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

Having lived through the Carter and Reagan administrations, and was active duty Navy during all of Carter, I can testify that post facto white washing of Carter is all partisan bullshit. Dude was so bad that Ted Kennedy was a serious threat to take him out and Moonbeam Brown was a contender. Carter’s one shining moment was putting Paul Volker in at the fed.

 

[Billiejeens]

Cult fucks love to rewrite history.

If you listened to cult fucks, you would think the USA is the only nation on earth that has slavery in their past, when the reality is that EVERY SINGLE NATION ON EARTH HAS SLAVERY IN THEIR PAST.

Here is just another bullshit narrative.

Carter was awful, other than not starting a war.

Trump didnt start a war either.

Carter was definitely awful
But, one of the last Democrats that didn't hate the country.

 

[tyroneweaver]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

Jimmy cawwter. Professing Christian and joins a organization that’s its antithesis.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Cult fucks love to rewrite history.

Yes, your stolen election rhetoric went stale after a few months, yet you're still spewing it.

 

[j-mac]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

Why should I care about Noah Smith's lefty, Krugman like opinion of history? He's just another confirmation bias you want to exhibit to troll.

 

[JustAGuy1]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

There is no lie that Carl won't embrace or a terrible Dem Prez he wouldn't defend.

 

[basquebromance]

Amazon.com.br

excerpt:

Carter was a Democratic president, but he accomplished many things commonly associated with Ronald Reagan. It was Carter, not Reagan, who ended rampant inflation by appointing Paul Volcker as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board; Carter, not Reagan, who cut the deficit and the growth rate of the federal workforce; Carter, not Reagan, who first broke with the Richard Nixon–Henry Kissinger policy of detente with Moscow by inviting Soviet dissidents to the White House and building the MX missile. Contrary to his reputation, Carter—after some hesitation—showed toughness by placing intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe. His Pentagon developed the B-2 stealth bomber and other high-tech weapons that the Soviet Union could not match. He sharply increased the defense budget and approved covert aid to anti-Communist Afghan rebels, who helped turn Afghanistan into the Soviet Union’s Vietnam.

And yet Carter also took risks for peace—and paid a political price for avoiding escalation, most conspicuously in the case of the Panama Canal Treaties. Ratified despite fierce opposition, the treaties prevented the deployment of more than a hundred thousand troops to the Canal Zone and dramatically improved the image of the United States across Latin America.
Carter was the first president with a policy devoted explicitly to promoting individual human rights in other countries. While applied unevenly, the new approach helped hasten the demise of more than a dozen dictatorships, gave hope to dissidents worldwide, and set a new and timeless global standard for how governments should treat their own people. Conservatives who had once thought it naive later admitted that the policy helped win the Cold War. And in the wake of the Vietnam War and CIA abuses that left the United States deeply unpopular in many parts of the world, the humble and respectful approach of the Carter administration offered a model for repairing America’s global reputation in the 2020s.

Carter forged the nation’s first comprehensive energy policy and historic accomplishments on the environment that included strong new pollution controls, the first toxic waste cleanup, and doubling the size of the national park system. He set the bar on consumer protection; signed two major pieces of ethics legislation; carried out the first civil service reform in a century; established two new Cabinet-level departments (Energy and Education); deregulated airlines, trucking, and utilities in ways that served the public interest; and took federal judgeships out of the era of tokenism by selecting more women and blacks for the federal bench than all of his predecessors combined, times five. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whom he appointed to the appellate court, said Carter “literally changed the complexion of the federal judiciary,” though he never had a Supreme Court vacancy to fill. Carter did the same for the executive branch, while empowering for the first time the vice president and the first lady, both of whom were given far more responsibilities than any of their predecessors.

So much legislation passed on his watch that major bill-signing ceremonies—a rarity in later administrations—were greeted by the jaded press with yawns. While Carter served only one term, he was, unlike Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, backed by a Democratic Congress for all four years, with a Senate where filibusters were rare. This meant that for all of his problems, he enacted more of his agenda than any postwar American president except Lyndon Johnson, whose legislative program was so big it made the next Democratic president’s look underwhelming by comparison. Even little-publicized Carter bills changed parts of American life, from requiring banks to invest in low-income communities to legalizing craft breweries. While Carter suffered several painful defeats—on tax reform, welfare reform, consumer protection, and health care—he won much more than he lost. This scorecard went largely unnoticed, in part because the aggressive post-Watergate press tended to assume the worst about him.

Carter himself made a good argument that his most lasting foreign policy achievement was walking through the door that Richard Nixon had opened to China in 1972. He ended Nixon’s and Gerald Ford’s unworkable “two-China policy” (which tilted toward Taiwan) and established full diplomatic relations with Peking, a move that launched the world’s most important bilateral relationship.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Carter was definitely awful
But, one of the last Democrats that didn't hate the country.

Thats fair.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

If you, like me, grew up in the United States of America, you’ve probably heard a story of the late 1970s and early 1980s that goes something like this: “In the 70s, Carter’s liberal big-government policies resulted in runaway inflation. Reagan came in and defeated inflation, and produced an economic boom with deregulation and tax cuts. Reagan also embarked on a massive defense spending binge which, although it increased the deficit a lot, forced the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up, and thus won the Cold War.”

That might sound like a straw man, but the narratives we tell each other about the past often consist of exactly such straw men. And debunking those narratives might feel like shooting at easy targets, but it’s helpful for taking a closer look at history.

Anyway, the above narrative is almost entirely wrong. Carter was a deregulator who didn’t increase deficits much, and appointed the Fed chair who beat inflation. Reagan didn’t do much deregulating, nor did he increase defense spending much as a share of GDP — and the USSR didn’t fall because of the arms race. Let’s go through these points one by one.

Much of what you've heard about Carter and Reagan is wrong

Debunking our narratives of the late 70s and early 80s

noahpinion.substack.com

Good article that disspells a lot of the BS that will be coming after Carter passes.

Lol, wrong, I lived through the gas lines, massive inflation, and carters failed hostage deal. Don't even try it dude....

 

[80zephyr]

Reagan was so bad that when he ran for re-election, he only won 49 states. Lol

 

[ColonelAngus]

People who argue with receipts crack me up.

Carter was trash. Sad that he is going to pass, but he is nearly 100.

I am sad about the 16 year old who died of fentanyl poisoning. That is sad.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Lol, wrong, I lived through the gas lines, massive inflation, and carters failed hostage deal. Don't even try it dude....

CULT FUCKS try to rewrite all history.

It is certainly consistent with their communist beliefs to change the past to fit their lies.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

What the OP and the author of the article misses is a very key fact when it comes to Carter vs Reagan.

It's not the fact that interest rates climbed to 17% (which is what I paid when I purchased my first house in 1980), it's the black cloud that followed Carter around.
Carter, was a "downer" pure and simple. Everything about him exuded negativity.
Put on extra layers when you're sitting in your own home, turn down the thermostat, don't ask for water when you're in a restaurant, expect long lines when you head to the nearest gas station, don't expect to be able to buy a house, boycott the Olympics, the man lived with a frown on his face.

I've said many times on these boards, that I dreaded seeing Carter on TV, because you always had this "oh no, what's happened now feeling?!!!

Carter 100% created the rise of Reagan. With Reagan it was "it's morning in America", and that's all it took for voters to throw Carter in the trash.

Four years after defeating Carter, Reagan won 49 out of 50 states! Let that sink in, the only state he lost was his opponents home state.

Carter has always been deemed one of, if not the worst president of the 20th century, and he deserved it with his horrible leadership skills.

 

[Dragonlady]

Cult fucks love to rewrite history.

If you listened to cult fucks, you would think the USA is the only nation on earth that has slavery in their past, when the reality is that EVERY SINGLE NATION ON EARTH HAS SLAVERY IN THEIR PAST.

Here is just another bullshit narrative.

Carter was awful, other than not starting a war.

Trump didnt start a war either.

Only the USA had "chattel slavery". In fact, you invented it. All of the other civilized nations in the world ended slavery in 1810, but the USA not only clung to the notion. You compensated plantation owners for their "property" when Lincoln freed the slaves, but you never compensated the slaves. Just freed them, and turned them loose with nothing.

Carter was not in the least bit "awful". He's the guy that green lit all of your "smart weapons" that won the Gulf War for you. But he wasn't a Washington insider, and he didn't have a good grasp of how the Federal government worked. He was considered "too honest" for Washington. Then he foolishly decided not to campaign for re-election as long as the hostages were being held in Iran.

Trump didn't start a war, he just let a pandemic run loose in the country and killed a million people that way.