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.
Ron Paul for sure didn't and I don't think Reagan did. Trickle down is media driven. The idea was less taxes = less government involvement in the free market. Less crony capitalism.
Less taxes, means less to spend, means less government in We The Peoples lives, means more in our pocket to get bigger and less in the governments pocket to get bigger, means more economic growth and prosperity. You also have to have incentives for people to save some of that prosperity, so banks can function as intended, instead of playing the stock market and not loaning for growth. Less than 1% interest, just makes banks irrelevant, to charge you to store your cash.
Remember all the lies that Obama & Co. told us about the sequester as well as the doom & gloom speeches about how disastrous it would be for too many federal agencies to count as well as the fact that Social Security and other government checks checks might not be sent out?
The difference between what Reagan inherited and what Obama inherited is that Reagan fixed the economy before he was re-elected, while the so-called Obama 'recovery' has created a whopping 11,000net new private sector jobs since the recession ended as http://www.investors.com pointed out yesterday.
That didn't start until 2011, when the Tea Party came on the scene in the House.
You can thank the Tea Party for that little gift.
Exactly. Spending spiked upward after 2008 under the triumvirate of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi. After 2010 spending stopped increasing, thanks to the efforts of Boehner and Cantor, as detailed in The Price of Politics by Robert Woodward. However a new normal had been established, and with limited political capital, R's could not get significant cuts.
The article is in the Wall Street Journal. What happened to the National Debt under Reagan?
It is not the people on Wall Street that will be paying back any of the National Debt. So what "worked" to their advantage doesn't matter if it screwed up everyone else.
Obama was a dummy for not letting Hillary have the presidency.
Reagan's economic plan was to do trickle down tax cuts, these are tax cuts for large corporations and the rich. Reagan said if we give the rich tax cuts they will create jobs.
Obama's economic plan is to lower taxes on the middle class and do stimulus packages.
No respected economists favor trickle down economics. In the business world if someone has a new idea or a new product that is wanted by consumers, investors will naturally fund that business idea (like the tv show "Shark Tank.) Tax cuts for the rich don't create jobs, new and wanted products create new jobs.
Economists favor tax cuts for the middle class and stimulus packages to stimulate the economy. When you give the middle class tax cuts they spend the money in stores, bars, restaurants, internet service, and this spending stimulates the whole economy.
"No respected economists favor trickle down economics. In other words you ONLY respect economists who agree with you.
We tend to forget that Ronald Reagan in 1980 inherited an economic mess arguably as bad as that inherited by Pres Barack Obama. I am old enough to remember it. Like today, I heard lots of accounts of guys with graduate degrees driving cabs and working at restaurants. When Reagan took office in Jan '81, unemployment was 7.5% and rising. There was double digit inflation, and 20% interest rates. GDP "growth" was actually negative.
Reagan promised and delivered a set of remedies guided by conservative/free market ideology. Unemployment continued to go up, but by 1983, as his policies started to kick in, it went down and reached 5.3 percent in his last full month in office. GDP grew at a healthy 4.3% in 1983, and zoomed to over 7% in 1984. Reaganomics had proven to be a success by 1984, and Reagan was re-elected in a landslide, losing only 1 state plus DC.
This was a kind of lab experiment, and the result seems pretty clear.
Reagan slashed income taxes for the wealthiest Americans and then was forced to raise taxes 11 times, which hurt mostly the middle and lower class. He increased defense spending to outspend the USSR, tripled the deficit, raided the SS trust. He left George H. Bush to preside over a recession as a one-termer because after Reagan's inflated defense spending stopped, so did the jobs and economy. His admin put all the expenses on a credit card. He cut funding for mental hospitals and helped to create our current homeless population and he cut college tuition aid.
In 1986, he granted amnesty to 2.5 million illegal immigrants already in the country. This bill was supposed to increase enforcement of hiring illegal immigrants. But the US Chamber of Commerce and large agriculture corporations lobbied Congress into backing off enforcement. This bill actually encouraged and led to further illegal immigration.
It always amazes me that people look at today's problems and blame whoever the current president is, when the seeds for much of the country's misery were planted decades ago.
Apples and oranges. In 1981, unions were powerful. This created an imbalance, tilted heavily toward the demand side. The supply side was weak. Reagan brought needed balance to that equation. Today, we see the opposite; too much money in the hands of the few; who represent supply.
"No respected economists favor trickle down economics. In other words you ONLY respect economists who agree with you.
MANY respected economists DISAGREE WITH YOU.
Agreed. The word "respected" is arrogant.
We don't need economists' opinions, though. We just need to look at the numbers. Wages have stagnated, while wealth has become more concentrated among those at the top. Trickle-down economics works in certain situations (the early '80s being one of those situations), but it is not a prescription for overall growth at all times.
I once thought that Presidents controlled the economy, then I graduated from grade school.
It wasn't Bush's fault?
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.
