The Sad Legacy of Ronald Reagan

[hellofromwarsaw]

#38-Stockman was on the cover of Time for being so, was the king of supply side. Dittohead moron. And you fools go on about the commie Jones as some kind of argument. More of Raygun's legacy- Newt's BS talking points, and Rush's character assassination by BS guilt by association. You are hopelesslymisinformed, strong and wrong Ugly 'Mericans... Obamahhhh!

 

[Too Tall]

Is it really possible that all the triumphant declarations that the Reagan tax cuts led to a revenue boom — declarations that you see in highly respectable places — are based on nothing but a failure to make the most elementary corrections for inflation and population growth? Yes, it is. I know we’re supposed to pretend that we’re having a serious discussion in this country; but the truth is that we aren’t. - Reagan and revenue - NYTimes.com

Krugman LIES!

Under President Reagan, federal revenues increased even with tax cuts, federal spending did not decrease, the country experienced the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime in its history, and the rich paid more taxes proportionately than they had before the tax cuts were implemented.
• Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue.
• As a percentage of the gross domestic product (GDP), federal revenues declined only slightly from 18.9 percent in 1980 to 18 percent in 1990.
• Revenues from individual income taxes climbed from just over $244 billion in 1980 to nearly $467 billion in 1990. In inflation-adjusted dollars, this amounts to a 25 percent increase.

And what do you believe caused that growth?

Reagans policies and leadership.

 

[Robert]

And I thank Ronald Reagan for single handily CRUSHING the life out of Soviet Union and ending a major form of Socialism from the world stage THANK YOU Mr Reagan for having the vision to do what needed to be done.

Reagan's administration was SPECTACULARLY successful in that regard and restoring american self-confidence and prosperity. The faux "republicans" want to lay at Reagan's doorstep the consequences of the democrat created ponzi schemes of social security and medicare/medicaid. It will only work with those who don't know the history. Unfortunately, as 2008 showed, there are many idiots-with-a-vote.

Reagan was also handed one of the single worst economic disaster's of modern times that up until now with obama who has managed to turn a downturn into what amounts to our history's greatest failure. Carter has thanked Obama several times now for taking the reins of being greatest failure of our times.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Murdoch is obviously the scumbag misleading the ignorant, not Soros, but thanks for the brain washed history lesson. Raygun's legacy is voodoo economics that led to the gutting of the middle class and a Depression, and blustery covert/adventurist BS that led to THREE STUPID wars under the incompetent Boooooshes.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Wilson's legacy is idealism destroyed by Pubs, Truman's honesty, LBJ the Great Society and recognizing that Vietnam was a failure- your version of their legacies are total irrelevancies.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Is it really possible that all the triumphant declarations that the Reagan tax cuts led to a revenue boom — declarations that you see in highly respectable places — are based on nothing but a failure to make the most elementary corrections for inflation and population growth? Yes, it is. I know we’re supposed to pretend that we’re having a serious discussion in this country; but the truth is that we aren’t. - Reagan and revenue - NYTimes.com

Is it really possible that all the triumphant declarations that the Reagan tax cuts led to a revenue boom

The purpose of tax cuts is not to increase government revenue.

 

[ShackledNation]

Krugman LIES!

Under President Reagan, federal revenues increased even with tax cuts, federal spending did not decrease, the country experienced the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime in its history, and the rich paid more taxes proportionately than they had before the tax cuts were implemented.
• Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue.
• As a percentage of the gross domestic product (GDP), federal revenues declined only slightly from 18.9 percent in 1980 to 18 percent in 1990.
• Revenues from individual income taxes climbed from just over $244 billion in 1980 to nearly $467 billion in 1990. In inflation-adjusted dollars, this amounts to a 25 percent increase.

And what do you believe caused that growth?

Reagans policies and leadership.

So I guess it had nothing to do with the fact that Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker completely reversed the inflationary monetary policy of the Federal Reserve and actually destroyed rather than created money, thus bringing interest rates more in line with savings?

Reagan's policies did not grow the economy. His policies, Congresses policies--whoever was at fault for enacting them--were tax, spend, and expand government. Those policies have failed throughout history. The one thing different under Reagan was what the Federal Reserve did, and his rhetoric.

 

[Patrick2]

"And I thank Ronald Reagan for single handily CRUSHING the life out of Soviet Union and ending a major form of Socialism from the world stage"

More BS myth: Gorby did it, and we're lucky Ronnie Bluster didn't screw it up and bring the hard liners back. All he did was break OUR budget, and start the ball rolling with ALLY Saddam and abandoning Afghanistan, after arming Bin Laden. Also made greed and discrimination acceptable. A nightmare.

Cartoonish pseudo-history for the illiterati.

 

[Patrick2]

Wilson's legacy is idealism.

WHOA! Only here could one read a statement of such breathtaking ignorance!

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

#49-Ever hear of the League of Nations, MORON?

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Masters in French Civilization, Certified World History Teacher...you?

 

[Dante]

And I thank Ronald Reagan for single handily[sic] CRUSHING the life out of Soviet Union and ending a major form of Socialism from the world stage THANK YOU Mr Reagan for having the vision to do what needed to be done.

btw, did you mean: single-handedly?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Reagan makes Progressive sad because he beat their home-team the USSR so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party.

Boo

*******

Hoo.

 

[Dante]

You want to go round and round with me on this? Hokay!

The OP WAS just raw numbers, without any analysis of the history behind the numbers.

Reagan HUGELY reduced tax rates with the 1981 tax cut.

Reagan agreed to a democrat proposal for a tax increase with a $2 for $1 spending cut in 1982.

Reagan had to greatly ramp up the military because of the consequences of carter's appeasement policy which unleashed a huge soviet military buildup and anti-US aggression all over the world. This was expensive. To do otherwise would have been almost treason. That he HAD to do this says NOTHING about his philospohy of cutting spending when it's POSSIBLE.

OK - now you repeat your standard anti-Reagan post.

from a man who ran Reagan's Office of Management and Budget:

FREELAND: You worked for Ronald Reagan. Do you think the American economy — so you’re, like, a red-blooded capitalist — could it sustain higher taxes than it has now?

STOCKMAN: Absolutely.

Note the brazen dishonesty of the leftwing? You represent the single defector from the Reagan administration, who was fired by Reagan, as representative of the Reagan administration.

David Stockman fired?

I believe this Wikipedia entry to be correct: After Stockman's first year at OMB and after "being taken to the woodshed by the president" due to his candor with Atlantic Monthly's William Greider, Stockman became inspired with the projected trend of increasingly large federal deficits and the rapidly expanding national debt.

On 1 August 1985, he resigned OMB and later wrote a memoir of his experience in the Reagan Administration titled The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed (ISBN 0060155604),

1) Reagan was upset with Stockman in the early part of Reagan's 1st administration.

2) Reagan kept Stockman on through his re-election. Stocman left in 1985?

3) David Stockman's Office of Management and Budget delivered the Reagan Economic revolution of 'Good Budget Deficits' and "Manageable Debt' that started the debt crisis that almost killed the world economy in 2008.

4) Stockman almost single-handedly got Reagan re-elected in 1984. How? Reagan was considered a one-term President before the 1984 election season started in earnest. Conservatives of most all stripes were angry at him.

The above can be vetted in major news articles of the day, con and lib

So you think you know something about Reagan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Stockman#Office_of_Management_and_Budget tell me exactkly what you disagree with in the wiki article

 

[Oddball]

Wilson's legacy is idealism...

Wilson's legacy is warmongering and authoritarian tyranny.

Little wonder you like him.

#49-Ever hear of the League of Nations, MORON?

Yeah...It crashed and ******* burned....Just like the UN ought to.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I dont care how many revenues went where or how much love fan boys project onto their hero.

The 80s sucked...hard

 

[Antiderivative]

Ever since Reagan came onto the scene the Republican mantra has been tax less, spend more. Here is Hayek on the Reagan tax cuts:

Austrian economist (in more ways than one!) Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992) had much the same views as Stockman on the Reagan tax cuts, and would no doubt have been appalled by the tax cuts of GW Bush. Here is Hayek, in a December 1982 interview with the New York Times.

On the scale on which [tax cutting] is being tried, I’m a little apprehensive. I’m all for reduction of government expenditures but to anticipate it by reducing the rate of taxation before you have reduced expenditure is a very risky thing to do.

The only way you can finance deficits is by inflation. You cannot raise this amount of money by genuine borrowing. You borrow from banks, which create credit for the purpose. A large government deficit is a certain way to inflation.

“A Nobel Winner Assesses Reagan”, New York Times, 1 December 1982.​

Hayek on the Reagan tax cuts « Thought du Jour


P.S. And those people over at Mises aren't crazy as you think. There is a lot of valuable wisdom over there

 

[bodecea]

Wilson's legacy is idealism...

Wilson's legacy is warmongering and authoritarian tyranny.

Little wonder you like him.

#49-Ever hear of the League of Nations, MORON?

Yeah...It crashed and ******* burned....Just like the UN ought to.

He also codified racism in the Federal Government.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And what do you believe caused that growth?

Reagans policies and leadership.

So I guess it had nothing to do with the fact that Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker completely reversed the inflationary monetary policy of the Federal Reserve and actually destroyed rather than created money, thus bringing interest rates more in line with savings?

Reagan's policies did not grow the economy. His policies, Congresses policies--whoever was at fault for enacting them--were tax, spend, and expand government. Those policies have failed throughout history. The one thing different under Reagan was what the Federal Reserve did, and his rhetoric.

You ever ask yourself why the Fed is so apparently ineffectual today?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I love that Progressives lost their media monopoly! Love it!

They're whiny little "Gorby beat the Soviet Union" looks so stupid and totally detached from reality.

They got away with "FDR's New Deal save American from capitalism, Joe McCarthy's HUAC started a Red Scare and blacklisted innocent Hollywood artists" but No More!!

LOL!

You Libs are so totally fucked!