The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Carl on August 02, 2010, 05:10:01 PM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8866355
Sparkly (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:18 PM
Original message
Why does anyone STILL say Reagan "revitalized the economy?!"
It was BS then and it's BS now!
Yeah, if you take cash advances on your credit card, you'll "revitalize your wallet."
If you buy lots of stuff on credit for four years, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" is a great question, as long as you ignore the bill.
Meanwhile if you say lots of cheery things about how great things are, people will have more "pride and confidence" and sing, "don't worry -- be happy."
Reagan and the Elder Bush got us into the mess we are STILL in today. Bush II made it incredibly worse in a short period of time. Now President Obama can only do the very thing they should never have done in the first place -- borrow and spend just to make a start at digging out of it.
And Reagan revitalized the economy?!?!????
Give me a break!!
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. They are following through with the myth...
Edited on Mon Aug-02-10 05:21 PM by JuniperLea
Reaganomics... you know, the stuff that George HW Bush called VooDoo Economics... they didn't work with Reagan, they didn't work AGAIN with W. Funny how they didn't listen to HW, and he's not quoted in this discussion either. He also knew it would be bad to go after Saddam Hussein. Maybe I like him more than the GOP does? I know I spent 8 years wishing he were still Prez instead of Jr.
Sparkly (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. How can anyone hear that and not laugh, sneer, yell, or in SOME way react??
If somebody said, "Green men from Mars with springs on their feet and wheels for hands really got the economy going back in the 1980s," -- whatever the reaction to that should be the reaction to "Reagan revitalized the economy."
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Amazing, isn't it?
The Low Information Voters also have a Memory Deficiency. Not sure why I capitalized those words... except to make them all the more indelible in my own mind.
tanyev (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's become an article of faith in the Republican cultus.
Similar to reciting the Apostle's or Nicene Creed every Sunday in church.
Warpy (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because they keep hearing it on the teevee
and they repeat it to other people 'cause they think it makes them sound smart.
Unfortunately for them, the major media are just now starting to let it slip that Reagan was a disaster for them and the whole country.
Sparkly (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Do they just not remember?
Were they not paying attention then, or shortly thereafter, or a little while after that, or more recently, or EVER??
upi402 (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Please just do as Reverend Jones says
Just drink the Kool Aid and lay down people.
FormerDittoHead (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. They ignore the deficits because they believe that borrowing for the military makes debt disappear.
If you ever listen to them about the New Deal, they conclude that it wasn't the New Deal that ended the Great Depression is was WWII.
Of course, this is to argue against New Deal programs! What they don't conclude is, "Well, if we had government spending for domestic projects instead of the military, our economy would benefit the same way, only unlike the military, we'd actually have something to show for our money instead of billion dollar jets which are never to be flown..."
Sparkly (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Hah! Like eating standing up in front of the frig makes calories not count.
You're right -- they didn't blink an eye when the Chimperor spent BILLIONS without even budgeting a dime of it.
FormerDittoHead (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. Oh, I forgot, but check out this revisionism I read on a local BBS the other day...
re: why investors aren't hiring...
Banks, investors (big and small), and industry are accumulating very large hoardes of cash right now because they don't know what's coming nationally. Remember, I am a supply sider. When national economic policy certainty returns, the capital will flow again. The IDENTICAL "capital strike" happened in the mid to late '30's as FDR adopted an increasingly populist, anti-business stance. Finally, Morganthau got the courage to stand up to his old friend and neighbor. By '38, things were getting better. The War did not really pull us out of Depression; it was an expensive side trip. The proof that capital flows without government interference was the Truman, Eisenhower, and tax-cutter JFK years, which were one of the best times we've ever had.
You LITERALLY could read volumes and college course to debunk every fairy tale woven here, but I think the point is how they weave these myths up in a self-reinforcing fable.
kenny blankenship (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
11. He discovered the power of borrowing to the hilt, while angrily shaking your cane
at profligates, wastrels and spendthrift, "tax-and-spend" Democrats.
Great politics, and great economics - until the bill comes due.
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-02-10 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
12. Because they are still clapping and clapping and clapping and clapping
I don`t know,22 years of pretty sustained economic growth might have something to do with it.
The entire thread and not one post explaining anything...DUmp intellect at its finest.
-
Every time I think they can't get any DUmber..............
-
Every time I think they can't get any DUmber..............
I've come to the conclusion that there just isn't any bottom to that well, sir. It's a giant, sucking hole through the center of the universe. IQs drop just being in proximity to it.
-
BECAUSE. HE. DID.
-
JuniperLea
The Low Information Voters also have a Memory Deficiency.
No kidding. And everytime I read a post from Skin's island from primitives like you or listen to other libs talk about why they still support Dear Leader, I'm reminded of just how deficient the left is.
.
-
21.5% Prime Rate under Jimeah Car-tear.
Nuff said.
-
21.5% Prime Rate under Jimeah Car-tear.
Nuff said.
And coming soon to an 0bamao regime near you...
-
OK not enough said.
Jimblys Inflation Rate 1980 13.5%
Ronnies Inflation Rate 1988 4.1%
NOW, nuff said.
-
Because he managed to take the Carter "malaise", the gas lines, and "Misery Index" (among other things) of the late 70's and with the exception of the recession in 1981-82, which was primarily a result of S&L failures due to high interest rates, as well as a continuation (aka, "double bounce") of the recession which began in 1980, as well as still-high income tax rates until 1982. Only after inflation was brought under control by the Fed in the middle of 1982 did interest rates begin to decline, as did unemployment, and resulted in a steady increase in GDP. Coupled with the budget cuts and tax cuts (although Reagan DID pass $100 Billion in a 3-year tax increase in 1982 with TEFRA.), unemployment declined from 10.8 percent in November of 1982 to 7.2 percent two years later. Reagan's popularity, which had been in the mid-30's in early 1983 (coincidentally, the same time period the MSM uses to cite the "decline" of conservatism in 2010 America), rose to the point he easily defeated Mondale in 1984.
One might even be able to draw parallels between then and now with the looming "double dip" coming in 2011 and beyond.
The major differences between then and now are these:
--No anticipated tax cut. Quite the contrary, massive tax increases are about to take place in 2011 and beyond.
--No decline in government spending. Under TEFRA, Reagan agreed to the temporary tax increases provided Congress cut spending for $3 for every $1 in tax increases. Under Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress, we have seen deficits equal to 10 percent of GDP for each of the last two years, more than DOUBLE the highest deficit-to-GDP ratios of Reagan, Bush 41, or Bush 43.
--GDP to debt ratio. Even when Reagan left office in 1989, national debt was only approximately 35 percent of GDP. By 2010, it approaches 95 percent and increasing. More and more of the federal budget is being spent on interest payments on the debt.
--Increases to SSI and other entitlement spending. In the 1980's, the ratio of defense spending to GDP never rose higher than 6.2 percent, while "human resources" spending (Social Security, Medicare, etc) varied between 10.5 and 12.4 percent of GDP, or anywhere between 48.6 and 52.7 percent of all federal outlays. Defense spending was never higher than 28 percent of budget outlays. Today, we spend about 4.2 percent of GDP (or 18 percent of federal outlays) on defense, and 15.5 percent of GDP (or 66.3 percent of federal outlays) on human resources spending. Those latter numbers will increase significantly with the implementation of the healthcare bill between now and 2018, and the aging baby boom population retirement comes into full swing.
With these and other facts in hand:
Oh, shit. It's gonna SUCK in the next few years, people.
-
21.5% Prime Rate under Jimeah Car-tear.
Nuff said.
Actually, that was in 1982, under Volcker. The reason for that was to slow the inflation rate, which DID skyrocket under Carter and the early Reagan years. The high interest rates served to slow the economy, which created the second "dip" of the recession which began in 1980.
-
It was pretty tough the first couple of years, and most of that big defense tab came in the second term; but after Carter, Herbert Hoover would have counted as 'Revitalizing.' There's nothing more dangerous than a bunch of Democrats who *THINK* they understand economics, except maybe a second lieutenant with a map.
-
No matter what the DUmmies state or post, facts are facts. Facts are pesky things.
Reagan inherited from Jimmuh Carter's Misery index that Tom Brokaw aptly named in 1979. The "misery index" comprised three components: (1.) the inflation rate, which was in excess of 14%,(2.) interest rates, which were in excess of 21%, and the unemployment rate over 10%. You don't change the screw ups of progressive libs from both parties over night. Ronald Reagan, with help from Republicans and blue dog Democrats, was able to have the tax rates lowered to stimulate the economy.
It worked magnificently.
By the time Reagan left office in 1989, tax revenue to the US treasury had in effect doubled. The Reagan tax cuts lead to the influx of enormous amounts of capital to the fledgling tech industries in Silicon Valley and allowed very young companies like Microsoft and Apple to grow and thrive.
The problem never was with the tax cuts, it was the spending. Reagan's own Grace Commission in 1983
had found enormous waste in government. The Congress,both parties, did not have the will to make the necessary cuts in spending. Remember, the President proposes, the Congress disposes.
Reagan's policies allowed Bush Sr to succeed him. This is where the feces start s to hit the fan. "No new
taxes!" led directly to Sr's downfall because the new taxes implemented by Sr chilled the economy into
a very mild recession that Sr's successor, Clinton recognized in "It's the economy,stupid". Clinton
deftly used Reagan's tax policies and merely tweaked them, with tax increases, into prolonging the Reagan economic machine.
It is when Phil Gramm, a Repub, Sandy Weill of Citigroup, and Robert Rubin, Clinton's Secretary of the
Treasury got together and decided that Glass Stegall was obsolete and decided that banks can serve two
masters and allowed banks like Citi to develop,market,sell and manage financial products under one
roof is what led to the recent financial debacle. Glass Stegall was 20 pages, clearly written in the 20's. The 2010 Financial Reform Act is over 2,000 and we still don't know what is in the bill.
Reagan wasn't the problem, never was. It was the pols in both parties after him that caused the problem.
-
Hey, ReaganForRushmore, stop it with the reality crap, please?
:lmao:
How the DUmmies can COMPLETELY ignore the facts of history, still eludes me. They have to be insane. I really mean that. :mental:
-
Hey, ReaganForRushmore, stop it with the reality crap, please?
:lmao:
How the DUmmies can COMPLETELY ignore the facts of history, still eludes me. They have to be insane. I really mean that. :mental:
Understatement of the year, so far. I have faith the DUmmies will surpass this though, they never fail to express their ignorance of history!
I've got cow pies layin' around here that could beat these asshats in a debate!