Republican Presidents Destroyed the US Economy

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]JoeGood wrote:
Given that fiscal policy takes between 1 and 5 years to begin to take effect it is childish to try and ascribe ANY economic activity to the policies of any President. When combined with the fact that Congress has far more control over debt and spending levels you simple cannot reasonably make such a statement.

[/quote]

Thats is true, but it was Reagan who pushed for the tax cuts. We have to give credit where credit is due.[/quote]

Too bad he didn’t throw in some spending cuts too, huh?

62

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

So when you tell me I am mistaken , I think you are uninformed or just so intent on your agenda that you are unwilling to grasp to devastation that Reagan Created.[/quote]

Yea, Reagan devastated the country by creating over 20 million jobs. What the hell do you call what Obama’s doing to the country if you think Reagan devastated by succeeding.

Ha ha, keep posting you are making me laugh.

[/quote]

I take that back that is more than 400,000 a state that is a lot of fucking jobs surely you can point some out, that would be approx 50,000 for every county in Ohio

63

Maybe Obama destroyed all those jobs while he was in College???

64

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Where are these 20,000,000 jobs , that is approx. 50,000 a state .You avoid answering the question and insinuate any one that disagrees with you is out of touch or ignoring logic . I contend it is your defense so you do not have to answer the question[/quote]

Here you go, catch up on your history:

http://www.house.gov/jec/growth/prosper/prosper.htm

"For starters, let’s remember what things were like when Reagan took over. In 1980, inflation was running at 13.5 percent, the prime lending rate stood at 21.5 percent, unemployment and poverty were rising, real income and productivit were falling, and real economic growth had ceased.

Enter Reagan, who implemented deep, across-the-board tax cuts, curbed Washington’s regulatory bureaucracy, and instituted sound monetary policies tha restrained inflation. The results: the largest peacetime economic boom in U.S. history and nearly 20 million net new jobs."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4070/is_n97/ai_16320048/

“In 1984, the economy grew by 6.8% in real terms, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the next 7 years, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989. Even with the Reagan tax cuts, total federal revenues doubled from 1980 to 1990, growing from $517.1 billion to $1,031 billion, or just over $1 trillion. In Reagan’s last budget year, fiscal 1989, the widely overballyhooed federal deficit had declined to $152.5 billion, about the same as a percent of GDP as in 1980, 2.9% compared to 2.8%.”

65

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Maybe Obama destroyed all those jobs while he was in College???[/quote]

What Obama is doing to this economy will be felt for many generations to come in a very, very bad way. Unless of course the republicans take over the House and Senate (would be nice).

66

20 million jobs falls under the category of “funny numbers”, Zeb.

And if the GOP comes into power…will they implement the cuts in Medicare and Social Security that WILL doom us for years to come if not implemented?

We’ll see.

Mufasa

67

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]MikeyKBiatch wrote:
Norway? Wtf?[/quote]

There is always more to the story. 57.082902338% of statistics are made up on the spot, dontcha know?[/quote]

Isn’t that a picture of ABBA?[/quote]

I got no clue. Just a funny picture with a so-so caption. [/quote]

My question was to be funny, since the only thing good to come out of Scandinavia is ABBA. If you do not like ABBA then I guess my statement would be that nothing good has ever come out of Scandinavia.[/quote]
Or maybe it’s the only thing you know about it.

68

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
20 million jobs falls under the category of “funny numbers”, Zeb.[/quote]

Did you read my previous post?

69

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

Thats is true, but it was Reagan who pushed for the tax cuts. We have to give credit where credit is due.[/quote]

Too bad he didn’t throw in some spending cuts too, huh?
[/quote]

His budget that he presented always had massive spending cuts with the exception of 1 year, the blame belongs with the congress on the spending side.

70

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
20 million jobs falls under the category of “funny numbers”, Zeb.

And if the GOP comes into power…will they implement the cuts in Medicare and Social Security that WILL doom us for years to come if not implemented?

We’ll see.

Mufasa [/quote]

Cuts in social security/medicare will only result under a third party.

71

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
20 million jobs falls under the category of “funny numbers”, Zeb.[/quote]

Did you read my previous post?

[/quote]

I did.

What did I miss?

72

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

Thats is true, but it was Reagan who pushed for the tax cuts. We have to give credit where credit is due.[/quote]

Too bad he didn’t throw in some spending cuts too, huh?
[/quote]

His budget that he presented always had massive spending cuts with the exception of 1 year, the blame belongs with the congress on the spending side.[/quote]

…yeah, except all his “We have to beat the Soviet” military spending was off budget/extra-budget. Just like Bush’s budgets never looked that bad, because he kept most of the debt increasing spending off budget.

At least Reagen tried to pay for some of his secret wars with programs like Iran Contra, right?

73

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Where are these 20,000,000 jobs , that is approx. 50,000 a state .You avoid answering the question and insinuate any one that disagrees with you is out of touch or ignoring logic . I contend it is your defense so you do not have to answer the question[/quote]

Here you go, catch up on your history:

http://www.house.gov/jec/growth/prosper/prosper.htm

"For starters, let’s remember what things were like when Reagan took over. In 1980, inflation was running at 13.5 percent, the prime lending rate stood at 21.5 percent, unemployment and poverty were rising, real income and productivit were falling, and real economic growth had ceased.

Enter Reagan, who implemented deep, across-the-board tax cuts, curbed Washington’s regulatory bureaucracy, and instituted sound monetary policies tha restrained inflation. The results: the largest peacetime economic boom in U.S. history and nearly 20 million net new jobs."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4070/is_n97/ai_16320048/

“In 1984, the economy grew by 6.8% in real terms, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the next 7 years, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989. Even with the Reagan tax cuts, total federal revenues doubled from 1980 to 1990, growing from $517.1 billion to $1,031 billion, or just over $1 trillion. In Reagan’s last budget year, fiscal 1989, the widely overballyhooed federal deficit had declined to $152.5 billion, about the same as a percent of GDP as in 1980, 2.9% compared to 2.8%.”

[/quote]

Zeb I will read your article when you answer my question , where are these 20,000,000 jobs .
I remember the Carter Admin. I was a young adult. living on my own paying taxes supporting a family.

If Reagan added 20,000,000 that paid any taxes why did the deficits skyrocket ? Are you sure these 20,000,000 jobs weren’t in china , Viet Nam and the like ?

74

The steel industry collasped because the wages were out of whack with the edcuation and skill set needed to perfom the job. Because of this US production could not compete with outside sources.

Somehow though, when this is referenced, people seem to think the solution was to force American consumers to purchase overpriced steel.

75

[quote]JoeGood wrote:
The steel industry collasped because the wages were out of whack with the edcuation and skill set needed to perfom the job. Because of this US production could not compete with outside sources.

Somehow though, when this is referenced, people seem to think the solution was to force American consumers to purchase overpriced steel.[/quote]

That was then end of the Industrial era , That was the end of middle class. Some one has taught you that only the Wealthy and Educated are allowed to earn good money , I do not think we had to force people to buy steel . Allow more steel in to force American Steel to compete , Don’t just throw open the doors where they dump unsold steel on American shores forcing a fire sale .

Now that our Steel Industry is in the toilet , who do you think dictates the price ? Supply and demand would say that if you do away with part of the supply (AMERICAN STEEL) then prices will go up . So are we any farther ahead ?

76

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

At least Reagen tried to pay for some of his secret wars with programs like Iran Contra, right?
[/quote]

The one year I am talking about was the “starwars” program. Reagan did a great job, and if his budgets had been passed the debt levels would not have rose.

Reagan was the last great president the GOP has had, and probably will have for a long long time.

77

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

At least Reagen tried to pay for some of his secret wars with programs like Iran Contra, right?
[/quote]

The one year I am talking about was the “starwars” program. Reagan did a great job, and if his budgets had been passed the debt levels would not have rose.

Reagan was the last great president the GOP has had, and probably will have for a long long time.[/quote]

Who could forget about selling drugs to finance a war , I wonder if JUST SAY NO NANCY approved

78

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]JoeGood wrote:
The steel industry collasped because the wages were out of whack with the edcuation and skill set needed to perfom the job. Because of this US production could not compete with outside sources.

Somehow though, when this is referenced, people seem to think the solution was to force American consumers to purchase overpriced steel.[/quote]

That was then end of the Industrial era , That was the end of middle class. Some one has taught you that only the Wealthy and Educated are allowed to earn good money , I do not think we had to force people to buy steel . Allow more steel in to force American Steel to compete , Don’t just throw open the doors where they dump unsold steel on American shores forcing a fire sale .

Now that our Steel Industry is in the toilet , who do you think dictates the price ? Supply and demand would say that if you do away with part of the supply (AMERICAN STEEL) then prices will go up . So are we any farther ahead ?[/quote]

No, someone has taught me, correctly, that your wages will be set by how difficult you are to replace. Most of the steel workers in the 70’s had, at best, a high school education, and there was no economic rational for paying $25-$35/hour in the 70’s for a job you could teach pretty much anyone alive how to do.

You have confused the ability to do well economically with the right to do well economically. There is no such right.

I hold no illusions that Reagan was a perfect President but the steel industry died an entirely natural death.

Of course lots of the mini mills are now doing quite well because they adapted to a changing game. Adapt or die.

79

[quote]JoeGood wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]JoeGood wrote:
The steel industry collasped because the wages were out of whack with the edcuation and skill set needed to perfom the job. Because of this US production could not compete with outside sources.

Somehow though, when this is referenced, people seem to think the solution was to force American consumers to purchase overpriced steel.[/quote]

That was then end of the Industrial era , That was the end of middle class. Some one has taught you that only the Wealthy and Educated are allowed to earn good money , I do not think we had to force people to buy steel . Allow more steel in to force American Steel to compete , Don’t just throw open the doors where they dump unsold steel on American shores forcing a fire sale .

Now that our Steel Industry is in the toilet , who do you think dictates the price ? Supply and demand would say that if you do away with part of the supply (AMERICAN STEEL) then prices will go up . So are we any farther ahead ?[/quote]

No, someone has taught me, correctly, that your wages will be set by how difficult you are to replace. Most of the steel workers in the 70’s had, at best, a high school education, and there was no economic rational for paying $25-$35/hour in the 70’s for a job you could teach pretty much anyone alive how to do.

You have confused the ability to do well economically with the right to do well economically. There is no such right.

I hold no illusions that Reagan was a perfect President but the steel industry died an entirely natural death.

Of course lots of the mini mills are now doing quite well because they adapted to a changing game. Adapt or die.[/quote]

Your figured are a little skewed, I would say wages were 12 to 22 an hour ,

In this situation I would say right and ability are synonymous.

If you have an industry that is doing well, you do everything in your power to nurture it, you do not deliberately destroy it.If you feel they need to man up to competition , your actions should reflect that.

The mini mills that are doing well have taken one of the more profitable aspects like cold draw or a specialty steel like chromally . You may decide just to polish steel. location is also important , To process a product that Caterpillar uses and be right next door would be ideal

Reagan is a hero of the Republicans because even today he has employees that spin Public Relations for him , even though he is dead. He was not a popular President when he was alive as a matter of fact he was kind of like Ford and Quayle , know to be a bit dense

80

Reagan doubled the rate of social security taxes from 6% to 12%, he exploded the national debt, he gave amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants spawning the immigration problem we have now, he signed disarmament treaties, he ignored terrorist attacks on US troops, he negotiated with Iranian terrorists and traded arms for hostages, he raised taxes on gasoline, he created a new cabinet level department, he swelled the size of the federal governement. I have no idea why Reagan is a conservative icon, maybe because they lack anything better I suppose.