Did Reaganomics help the economy?

Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ]

Previous topic | Next topic

imbatshitcrazy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Jun 2010
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,492

09 Jun 2011, 3:36 pm

yes or no? if both, list pro's and con's

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

09 Jun 2011, 3:41 pm

I don't know about that, but i think anyone who thinks that Reagan-era taxes were too high is no true republican.

dionysian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 May 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 921
Location: Germantown, MD

09 Jun 2011, 3:42 pm

I'll just save time and list the pros:

.

_________________
"All valuation rests on an irrational bias."
-George Santayana

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

09 Jun 2011, 4:01 pm

In 1979, before Reagan, the wealthiest 2% of Americans have 9% of GDP. Today they have 23.5%.
so it works for some people.

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

09 Jun 2011, 4:49 pm

We saw substantially higher growth rates and gains in personal income under Reagan than in the previous two decades, so yes, it worked.

JakobVirgil wrote:

In 1979, before Reagan, the wealthiest 2% of Americans have 9% of GDP. Today they have 23.5%.
so it works for some people.

The majority of which happened under Clinton, not Reagan - though granted, still in years that most people considered good economically.

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

09 Jun 2011, 6:32 pm

[img][800:800]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/01/United_States_Income_Distribution_1947-2007.svg/2000px-United_States_Income_Distribution_1947-2007.svg.png[/img]

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

09 Jun 2011, 7:32 pm

It succeeded in making some people very rich, and in making a lot of people feel warm and fuzzy.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Jun 2011, 8:07 pm

The long term effects were not good. Reagan setup the slide into mega deficit that we see today. The U.S.A. got a one-two double whammy. First LBJ and his (so-called) Great Society and then the Reagan administration delivering $1.75 worth of government for ever $1.00 collected in taxes. Not good.

ruveyn

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

09 Jun 2011, 8:12 pm

I like eggs

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

09 Jun 2011, 8:12 pm

I like eggs

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Jun 2011, 8:23 pm

psychohist wrote:

We saw substantially higher growth rates and gains in personal income under Reagan than in the previous two decades, so yes, it worked.

JakobVirgil wrote:

In 1979, before Reagan, the wealthiest 2% of Americans have 9% of GDP. Today they have 23.5%.
so it works for some people.

The majority of which happened under Clinton, not Reagan - though granted, still in years that most people considered good economically.

There was a superficial bloom (always caused by economic bubbles) that faded even before Bush became president. The doc-com boom was bogus to the core. The economic down turn started before Bush was elected. The policies that lead to bad loans and the manipulations of Fannie Mae started way before Bush. The government provided perverse incentives to make very bad housing loans. The housing bubble expanded and collapsed and now we are paying the price.

ruveyn

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

09 Jun 2011, 9:00 pm

ruveyn wrote:

psychohist wrote:

We saw substantially higher growth rates and gains in personal income under Reagan than in the previous two decades, so yes, it worked.

JakobVirgil wrote:

In 1979, before Reagan, the wealthiest 2% of Americans have 9% of GDP. Today they have 23.5%.
so it works for some people.

The majority of which happened under Clinton, not Reagan - though granted, still in years that most people considered good economically.

That's what I've been saying for a while about the Housing Bubble, hopefully people here will actually listen this time.

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

09 Jun 2011, 9:13 pm

the banks were forced by ACORN forced with threat of violence and death
to make those loans.
They said no no please do not makes us make thoses loans they will hurt america.
but then ACORN Bill Ayers, a Young Obama and the devil Forced them to make the loans
liberals when will your treachery end ?
Why do you hate america?

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ]

Jump to:

Did Reaganomics help the economy? Post Reply New Topic

Did Reaganomics help the economy?