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.
If you look at this chart, you'll see that his growth rate was really scattered, with strong numbers for a while but later in his tenure dropping off in consistency.
The deeper problem is that a lot of liberals value broader concerns that fall through the market. When everything gets slashed, a lot of people fall through those holes. I can see the value in both sides, but there are major downsides as well.
I am not a R or D or any letter except since I'm a Christian Patriot so maybe I am a CP anyway the Reagan that was a near 50 year member of the occultic Bohemian Grove and who arranged for the 52 hostages to stay in Iran til he took the oath of office so he could take the credit - that Reagan? Or this one:
If you look at this chart, you'll see that his growth rate was really scattered, with strong numbers for a while but later in his tenure dropping off in consistency.
Not really, looks like robust growth from 1983-1990. In fact every year in that period turned out with above average growth. Point out this "dropping off" to us, because "later" in Reagan's presidency was strong and consistent.
Not really, looks like robust growth from 1983-1990. In fact every year in that period turned out with above average growth. Point out this "dropping off" to us, because "later" in Reagan's presidency was strong and consistent.
Or another way that points out how drastic the 70's were. It shows, too, how that was brought back in to check magically in the 1980's (nothing at all to do with Reagan's policies, it is what it is, ya know).
The United States Misery Index By Year (http://www.miseryindex.us/customindexbymonth.asp - broken link)
Quote:
The misery index was initiated by economist Arthur Okun, an adviser to President Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's. It is simply the unemployment rate added to the inflation rate. It is assumed that both a higher rate of unemployment and a worsening of inflation both create economic and social costs for a country. A combination of rising inflation and more people out of work implies a deterioration in economic performance and a rise in the misery index.
It also shows how undramatic this last "great" bump was. If anything both 2007 and 2009 got worse and we've yet to see how bad things really get.
Not really, looks like robust growth from 1983-1990. In fact every year in that period turned out with above average growth. Point out this "dropping off" to us, because "later" in Reagan's presidency was strong and consistent.
If that's your view, I look forward to your celebration of Obama's presidency. I actually do give him credit for guiding the economy back to growth, but 1-3% isn't exactly robust, whether it happens under Reagan or Obama.
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.
