Ronald Reagan Was Not All That Good for the Financial Lower Class, So Beware of ROMNEY, yes?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 18, 2012 9:09 AM GMT
    During the late 1970s and most of the 1980s, the country was in a deep recession. Energy prices peaked, inflation was high, and many Americans were out of work. As a result, Americans wanted change. President Reagan entered his presidency with clear goals to make those changes. Tired of decades of liberal social policy, Reagan wanted to reduce both the size and role of government in the United States. His domestic policy agenda focused on cutting taxes, balancing the budget, withdrawing support from social welfare programs, and returning some powers to the state governments. Reagan believed that if the US could accomplish these goals, the federal government could save billions of dollars and stimulate the economy at the same time.

    Reagan's conservative agenda was not particularly helpful to black Americans and women. The Reagan administration opposed abortion and, as mentioned previously, cut many programs to assist mothers, children, and minorities. Reagan's own administration and a large majority of those he appointed to other government positions were primarily white males. Reagan did appoint Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court during his tenure in office in an attempt to increase his popularity with female voters, but this single act hardly made up for his previous years of neglect.

    Many Americans were also displeased with Reagan's denial of the drug abuse problems in the country and with the AIDS epidemic that was spreading rapidly throughout the US. President Reagan viewed these problems with a moralistic lens; he figured that these problems reflected what he believed was the overall decline of American morals rather than a social problem that government could help solve.

    Reagan reasoned that if these tax cuts at the top of society could trickle down and make everyone richer, the government could stop many of its social welfare programs involving transfers of payments to the poor. Laffer's theory was generally referred to as supply-side economic theory or, more colloquially, Reaganomics, because Reagan promoted the policies.

    Reganomic principles went against everything that liberal Keynesian economic principles had taught. According to Keynesian theory, the economy could be stimulated by government spending. Supply-side economic theory sounded good in theory, but many economics believed it wouldn't accomplish much to stimulate the economy. As noted earlier, George Bush once referred to supply-side theory as voodoo economics for this very reason. Many economists doubted that tax cuts for the wealthy would ever generate spending let alone a trickle-down effect.

    True to his word, Reagan cut funding from many social welfare programs including food stamp programs, and various programs to assist for struggling mothers and children. During Reagan's first few years in office, the government cut welfare program spending by over $20 billion a year. He also succeeded in slashing taxes to a point where the government was barely collecting any income revenue.

    Without tax revenues, the government was unable to pay for the services it provided. Worse, even though Reagan dramatically reduced tax rates, he actually dramatically increased total government spending, particularly in the areas of defense, and ironically, social welfare programs. Although Congress cut billions of dollars a year from the social welfare agenda, the rate of spending was still increasing. The American President Biography series noted that social welfare spending increased between 1980 and 1988 from $313 billion a year to $533 billion a year.

    Because government revenue (taxes) did not equal government spending, the government was forced to borrow money each year. The national debt skyrocketed to unprecedented levels, almost $1 trillion. As a result, people in all sectors lost their jobs and inflation soared. The economic hardships of the time became evident in the stock market crash of 1987, one of the worst stock market crashes since the crash of 1929. Many historians and economists blame Reagan's 'voodoo economic' policies and extreme deficit spending for the crash and economic hardships, although that conclusion is debatable.

    http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/reagan/section8.rhtml

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 18, 2012 12:56 PM GMT
    file-130.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 18, 2012 1:22 PM GMT
    Romney disavowed Reaganomics in the last debate.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 18, 2012 1:41 PM GMT
    Caslon21000 saidRomney disavowed Reaganomics in the last debate.

    Has his running mate?

    Another Etch-A-Sketch moment for Mittens.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 18, 2012 2:03 PM GMT
    StephenOABC saidDuring the late 1970s and most of the 1980s, the country was in a deep recession. Energy prices peaked, inflation was high, and many Americans were out of work. As a result, Americans wanted change. President Reagan entered his presidency with clear goals to make those changes. Tired of decades of liberal social policy, Reagan wanted to reduce both the size and role of government in the United States. His domestic policy agenda focused on cutting taxes, balancing the budget, withdrawing support from social welfare programs, and returning some powers to the state governments. Reagan believed that if the US could accomplish these goals, the federal government could save billions of dollars and stimulate the economy at the same time.

    Reagan's conservative agenda was not particularly helpful to black Americans and women. The Reagan administration opposed abortion and, as mentioned previously, cut many programs to assist mothers, children, and minorities. Reagan's own administration and a large majority of those he appointed to other government positions were primarily white males. Reagan did appoint Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court during his tenure in office in an attempt to increase his popularity with female voters, but this single act hardly made up for his previous years of neglect.

    Many Americans were also displeased with Reagan's denial of the drug abuse problems in the country and with the AIDS epidemic that was spreading rapidly throughout the US. President Reagan viewed these problems with a moralistic lens; he figured that these problems reflected what he believed was the overall decline of American morals rather than a social problem that government could help solve.

    Reagan reasoned that if these tax cuts at the top of society could trickle down and make everyone richer, the government could stop many of its social welfare programs involving transfers of payments to the poor. Laffer's theory was generally referred to as supply-side economic theory or, more colloquially, Reaganomics, because Reagan promoted the policies.

    Reganomic principles went against everything that liberal Keynesian economic principles had taught. According to Keynesian theory, the economy could be stimulated by government spending. Supply-side economic theory sounded good in theory, but many economics believed it wouldn't accomplish much to stimulate the economy. As noted earlier, George Bush once referred to supply-side theory as voodoo economics for this very reason. Many economists doubted that tax cuts for the wealthy would ever generate spending let alone a trickle-down effect.

    True to his word, Reagan cut funding from many social welfare programs including food stamp programs, and various programs to assist for struggling mothers and children. During Reagan's first few years in office, the government cut welfare program spending by over $20 billion a year. He also succeeded in slashing taxes to a point where the government was barely collecting any income revenue.

    Without tax revenues, the government was unable to pay for the services it provided. Worse, even though Reagan dramatically reduced tax rates, he actually dramatically increased total government spending, particularly in the areas of defense, and ironically, social welfare programs. Although Congress cut billions of dollars a year from the social welfare agenda, the rate of spending was still increasing. The American President Biography series noted that social welfare spending increased between 1980 and 1988 from $313 billion a year to $533 billion a year.

    Because government revenue (taxes) did not equal government spending, the government was forced to borrow money each year. The national debt skyrocketed to unprecedented levels, almost $1 trillion. As a result, people in all sectors lost their jobs and inflation soared. The economic hardships of the time became evident in the stock market crash of 1987, one of the worst stock market crashes since the crash of 1929. Many historians and economists blame Reagan's 'voodoo economic' policies and extreme deficit spending for the crash and economic hardships, although that conclusion is debatable.

    http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/reagan/section8.rhtml



    "most of the 1980s, the country was in a deep recession"

    Most of the 80s ????? You really really need to do your homework on that one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2012 3:36 AM GMT
    When Obama says the math does not add up--the tax cuts and the spending, we must consider the risk that Romney will do some of the things Reagan did: cut taxes and increase spending (deficit spending).

    The question is, can we afford that play now?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2012 3:49 AM GMT
    @ Freedom Isn't Free,

    I can see reports that the recession was only from 1980-1982.

    for example, google U.S. recession and early 1980s.

    = = =

    Spark Notes should correct the statement.

    However:

    "By November 1984, voter anger at the recession evaporated and Reagan's re-election was not in doubt. Reagan was subsequently re-elected by a landslide electoral and popular vote margin in the 1984 presidential election. Immediately after the election, Dave Stockman, Reagan's OMB manager admitted that the coming deficits were much higher than the projections released during the campaign."



    Recession recovery via deficit spending and putting yourself and your children in debt is not a real recovery.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2012 8:29 PM GMT
    I myself began my ascent from low middle class in the late 1980s. And I am just a regular guy with a high school education. If I can do it, just about anyone can. icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2012 9:46 PM GMT
    But President Reagon was bloody good for America and thats more than can be said about Obama. You just can not afford another four years of him be cause he has failed all Americans as a whole.

    Open your eyes to the truth, America can not afford another term of Obama; Mitt is your hope of change.