<<<<Job creation from a cut in interest rates. Plain simple and a proven fact.>>
Proven by whom? I disagree. I've seen many articles that disagree also. Many factors contributed to the economy.>>
Yep many factors, of which Reagan was responsible for getting just one of those factors implimented. Hardly makes him responsible for some massive economic recovery in the 80's (and it wasn't really massive on the scale of history).
<<Oh well, so much for credibility. Greenspan didn't take his position until 1987.(took over to finish out someone else's term.)>>
Oh I admit I made a mistake, Greenspan has been Chairman so long I just refer to that name when I'm talking about the chairman. Yep I know it doesn't say that the way I wrote it, can't really say anything other than I type faster than I think half the time. Monetary policy of the Fed was responsible for the stimulating of the economy during the 80's, the only credit Reagan can get for any of that is nominating Greenspan to the Fed. In fact, I praise him for that. Best thing the old guy ever did.
<<Anyone who believes as I do can provide as much or more proof that the tax cuts of the 80's were a BIG factor in the economic boom.>>
Ok prove the big boom, and prove the Tax cuts were a huge factor in it. Reliable sources mind you, not some republican rag, financial sources.
<<. Besides, who was behind much of that governmental spending. YOU can't have it both ways. First you say the Dems. in congress helped by spending money, then you say to someone that Reagan could've held the debt down by vetoing those same bills. >>
I'm not trying to have it both ways, YOU ARE. There are two ways to view it, Reagan is directly responsible for all spending and tax cuts because of veto power or he has NO responsibility for either. You are trying to say that congress is responsible for the spending and Reagan is responsible for the cuts. WRONGO! Takes both offices to pass a bill and BOTH are responsible for ALL budgets. Reagan bears as much responsibility for the runaway deficit spending as he does for the tax cut, just as congress does. If congress overrides a Veto then they bear full responsiblity, but Reagan never veto'd any of the budget's.
<<<<Besides the fact that you apparently can't comprehend what I wrote before.>>
Ah, there we go, the true liberal colors....start insults and name calling when your argument doesn't hold up.>>
My chastizement was for going OFF topic on the discussion. This discussion is about wether Reagan should be credited for:
"He also slashed taxes, which ended double digit unemployment and double digit inflation. "
But you want to wander the discussion around and talk about stuff that is COMPLETELY unreleated to that, I chastize you for it and remind you to stay ON topic for the discussion and you throw your attempted liberal insult around.
<<<<He kicked employment up through deficit millitary spending, and quadrupled our debt in the process. All those Job's he created are long since gone, he created a defense spending economy that was unsustainable and most of those high paying defense jobs are gone the way of the dodo. >>
Wait, I thought governmental spending increased the economy. Must only work when Democrats do it.>>
Spending is only a temporary stimulus and short term because the spending commitments are usually open ended. And spending in areas like defense, areas where the jobs DON'T transition to non-wartime economies you are creating a huge future unemployment. I remember when all the defense suppliers melted down in the late 80's early 90's. I had a relative that worked for one, he now makes half the wage and had skills that no one in the private economy needed. Now there was some effective spending.
<<<<And no, the reduction in the top bracket from 70% to 36% didn't do anything for our economy other than allowing a large super wealthy class to be created. >>
Wrong. All taxpayer's income taxes were cut by Reagan, NOT just the top earners. That was a 25% cut ACROSS THE BOARD, not just the rich folks>>
Here are some quotes for you.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/bush203.htm
"But a 1996 study of tax policy and economic growth by Dartmouth's Skinner and Federal Reserve economist Eric Engen challenges the Kemp panel's conclusions. Engen and Skinner noted that the strongest period of growth came during World War II, when average tax rates grew from 3.6% to 25%. "
"Reagan's tax cut in 1981 was followed in 1982 by the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Harvard University economist Martin Feldstein, a Bush adviser, attributed the recovery not to the tax cut but to Fed interest rate cuts, a strong dollar and a resurgence of business investment."
"Tyson, the dean of the University of California's Haas School of Business, says Bush's father learned from Reagan that large tax cuts, phased in over time, can lead to huge budget deficits and political peril. When President Bush raised taxes in 1990, he may have assured his defeat in 1992."
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/54More.htm
"Ultimately, this is spin-doctor heaven, and loses sight of the real issue. The supply-siders (David Stockman, Paul Craig Roberts and Martin Anderson) had boasted that the 81 tax cuts would result in 5 percent economic growth in 1982, which would simply outgrow the deficit.1 In fact, 1982 turned out to be the worst year in postwar history, with negative growth of 2.2 percent. "
http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/bush203.htm
"If not cutting taxes means the surplus would instead be used for "major increases" in government spending, Greenspan said, "I would be far more in the camp of cutting taxes." Increased spending, he said, is "the worst of all possible worlds from a fiscal point of view, and that, under all conditions, should be avoided."
<<By your own reasoning, since you say Reagan wasn't responsible for the economic growth in the 80's, but the Fed was, I guess you can't credit Clinton for the growth in the 90's either.>>
Nope, Clinton only deserves credit for deadlocking the republican congress from doing something that would have damaged our economy.
<<BTW, the economic growth in the 90's started in early 1991 under then-president BUSH.>>
See what your big problem here is that you think anyone that doesn't declare Reagan savior of the world is a democrat. That is why you strayed off target in an attempt to attack something else you dislike about leftist policies. Your problem is that I'm not left or right, I'm in the center. I liked the republican congress and I liked that we had a democratic president at the same time, know why? Deadlock! They weren't able to hurt american or the economy with politics because they were too busy fighting each other!
Facebook
Twitter