Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Payroll taxes were increased ( a smart move, in theory) and then promptly borrowed by the fed and spent.
You made some good points, but I want to point out this common fallacy. The social security fund is invested in the safest investment in the world: government bonds. Describing it as "the government borrows and spends the SS fund" is a very misleading characterization. Among other things, it is a problem only insofar as you fear that the government will default on its bonds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gentlearts
I am not going to look up the statistics, because they are beside the point. The reason why I responded so strongly to Reagan is that he generated an atmosphere of hopefulness. He lifted us up and reinforced the greatness of this country and restored pride in this country.
This is contrary to the typical Liberal viewpoint of cynical doom and gloom, and keeping the common man hopeless and dependent upon the government.
In a capitalist society, the common man is dependent on capitalists or government. I'd prefer to depend on government.
I am not going to look up the statistics, because they are beside the point. The reason why I responded so strongly to Reagan is that he generated an atmosphere of hopefulness. He lifted us up and reinforced the greatness of this country and restored pride in this country.
This is contrary to the typical Liberal viewpoint of cynical doom and gloom, and keeping the common man hopeless and dependent upon the government.
So you admit your love for Reagan is based completely on style instead of facts?
The facts say Reagan was awful.
Dependent on government?
Reagan expanded government at an unprecedented rate. Obama would make conservatives proud when it comes to government slashing!
Name one good thing Reagan did? I mean for the American people,not corporations or illegal Aliens....it'll be a short list so it shouldn't take you long to compile.
He got his friends to donate new china for the White House.
Reagan did some good but some bad like all presidents.
you are right, this has been discussed on here for years and I wish it would just die.. First of all, there are 2 or more kinds of conservatism. there are mistakes made by everyone, some are just more willing to admit them, like Reagan and the world was a different place in 1980.
as for what he did good: if nothing else he brought back patriotism to our country, we were proud to be Americans, we were respected, as was he around the world, and he learned to work with both sides, when he couldn't he went to the people and got them to stand behind him. I don't think any of this can be denied, even by the Reagan haters!!! Of at least, if they are honest.
He made white people feel good because he was always beating down blacks and gays.
that has to be the most ridiculous statement I think I have ever seen here. He did neither, not ever!! Gays were hardly an issue when he was President, and he never picked on the poor or minorities in anyway.
There is no such thing as "typical" right wing deflection, because we don't typically deflect. Deflection is changing the subject. Telling someone their understanding is flawed isn't deflection. Just like my telling you now how flawed your understanding of the term deflection is, telling someone their understanding is flawed is a legitimate response. I'm not saying Limbaugh was right or that Limbaugh was wrong, but your response to what he said is incorrect.
Comedy on a Friday morning--I love it!
Did Limp-balls answer the question? Did he explain to the caller why his understanding was flawed?
Deflecting, dodging, ducking. Pick one. They all apply.
I trend neutral on all presidents and tend to believe they all tried to do the best they could with the cards they were delt. If Reagan had been a Democrat, I suspect many Republicans would have considered him one of the worst presidents. What he did have going for him was his admin hired the very best script writers. Reagan never varied from script and knew how to deliver a punchline.
His admin was mired up to their ears in muck and then there was the Iran Contra affair. That admin experienced the most indirements and convictions of any in history. Reagan claimed no knowledge and people believed him. Back then there was no political cable news or the Internet.
No one knew that he spent most of his time at his ranch - not the White House. Back then, people were not obsessed with the number of presidential vacation days. People seemed to understand that the president is never off duty.
His ran on a platform promice of balancing the federal budget and reducing taxes. Income taxes were reduced but we're not offset by a reduction in spending. So the federal debt trebled under his watch. People did not care.
The first attack by Islamic terrorists occurred in 1983 and destroyed the US embassy in Beruit. 63 people died. No one seemed to blame Reagan for not knowing and protecting the embassy.
Many seem to forget the S&L crisis where it became necessary for the federal government to bail out the thrifts.
Immigration reform was amnesty. Reagan promised to secure the borders and get tough with those who employed undocumented workers. Nuff said.
Real income , adjusted for inflation, did not increase. Walmart with low wage part time jobs replaced IBM as the nation's number one private sector employer. Then McDonalds pushed IBM to third place.
The Earned Income Tax Credit was substantially expanded and became the reason why low income earners with dependents don't pay federal taxes or have skin in the game. This dove tailed well with the decline in full time middle class wage jobs.
Hospitals became required to stabilize anyone who came through their doors, regardless of their ability to pay.
Federal funding for mental institutions was substantially cut and patients were put on the street.
Payroll taxes were increased ( a smart move, in theory) and then promptly borrowed by the fed and spent.
The Soviet Union was disolving regardless of who sat the oval. Had a Putin like character been at the helm, outcomes would have been substantially different than what happened, with or without the Reagan admin.
Reagan was pro gun control, understandable given he was shot. The people blamed the shooter not a failure of the Secret Service.
The seeds for NAFTA and repealing portions of Glass Seagal were planted and nurtured. Most did not take notice.
Reagan took direction from his handlers, well. Nancy knew how to amp up the pomp and circumstance. Back then, people chuckled about presidential gaffs and the media was not yet into selling sensationalism.
Reagan did the best he could with the hand he had been dealt.
And he started something really really good for us rich folks!
Did we have a massive welfare system back then for illegals? I mean in RR's era? I could see granting amnesty if the belief was they would be solid U.S. residents and grow here with their families rather than send all of their dough back home.
Negotiate with terrorists? You mean Iran-Contra? Well Iran experienced a genuine revolution which would temporarily upset international relations and they were but a piece in the Cold War and we had other active theatres to focus on close to home like Nicaragua.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
