Republican Leaders Debate Reagan's Relevance

Reaganomics worked, Obamanomics tanks

If you don't believe in trickle down economics, I can tell you than communism does a better job of keeping people in poverty than any thing else. Giving more to the people who do not produce, without requiring anything in return only encourages more laziness and inefficiency, while removing an incentive to work harder in the few who do produce.

Ask any cuban, why cuba will never get our of communism...because the cubans who want to work and achieve, LEFT and the lazy fools who want to sit around a wait for a government handout stayed behind. It is now a welfare state and there is no going back. Liberal fools talk about how wonderful the medical system is in cuba (I suppose compared to Haiti) But they forget, the medical system in Cuba was far superior to what it is now, before communism. For one thing, you could actually find medications you needed. What are we comparing really? Access to a physician is not healthcare. Access to the treatments and necessary tests for diagnosis with guidance by well trained physicians - without government intervention...is.

Reagan's Impact Haunts U.S. Today

Ronald Reagan's most salient contribution to American politics was his success in shifting the public's focus away from achieving long term goals to encouraging a short term mentality that focused on "me-ism" or what's in it for me? He ran up gigantic deficits and inculcated in the public the notion that Americans could have it all without paying for anything-- as long as the cost could be put on the national credit card and passed off on future generations. Reagan's disciple George W. Bush perfected this tactic, doubling the national debt in his eight year presidency.

The most pernicious aspect of Reagan was that he betrayed the ideals of his own generation-- the GI, or Greatest generation-- which had sacrificed mightily to build a better America for their children and grandchildren, replacing sacrifice and self denial with a consumer driven society in which Americans could have it all.. at the shopping mall, in larger homes and larger cars, with massive defense build-ups... without having to pay for it. The whole focus of American society shifted from making and doing to shopping and spending with savings rates in excess of ten percent falling to zero and eventually negative under Bush.

As for Reagan's supposed role in ending the Cold War, the Saudis had more to do with bankrupting the Soviet Union by opening the oil spigot in the early 80s, which ended high inflation and ensured Reagan's reelection while depriving Moscow of the petrodollars they needed to fund their military and keep their citizens fed.

Reaganomics.... a Joke!

I laugh every time I hear those who sing the praises of Reagan and his ideology. The first time Americans saw so many homeless people on the streets was when Reagan became president, and it's been that way ever since. And I'm always reminded of my econ professor's comment referencing Reagan's "trickle down econonmics". To pharaphrase, my professor said, the trouble with the Trickle down theory is that the money doesn't always trickle down but instead ends up in the pockets of the wealthy.

Thanks Professor! I now understand why the Repubs and neocons strategy of giving tax breaks to the rich these last (8) years has made the rest of us middle class Americans poorer.

I will never vote Republican.

Up is down for Reaganauts

Stephen - I'll agree that, from an economic perspective, Ronald Reagan's presidency was great - except for the things he actually did.

Economically, the things Ronald Reagan actually did were shortsighted bandaids, which is why, as 'Reaganomics' unravelled, it ruined George H. W. Bush's chances for reelection ("It's the economy, stupid" won the day for Bill Clinton). And when George W. Bush reinstated Ronald Reagan's policies, those policies were disastrous.

Ronald Reagan was a 'borrow and spend', 'big government' president, which was the exact opposite of what he said he was going to do.

The reason he did the exact opposite of what he said he was going to do was that everyone around him understood that what he said he was going to do was a ridiculous lie.

There is some question as to whether Reagan was an economic dolt (albeit an affable dolt) and believed that 'Reaganomics' would work, or whether he understood the joke being played on the American people and 'aw shucksed' his way through things in order to accomplish his goals.

The third possibility is that he deluded himself into believing his own words. After all, in his March 4, 1987 speech, he admitted he had broken the law in the Iran Contra affair and lied about it. But, when talking about what he had earlier told the American people, he said, "My heart and best intentions tell me that's true, but the facts and evidence tell me that it is not". His "heart and best intentions" told him he hadn't broken the law, even though he had, so he gave himself a pass on the lawbreaking and the lying. It would take someone with that self-delusional capability to convince himself that 'Reaganomics' would work.

As for destroying the American working class, I'm curious as to who is going to buy the cheap Chinese crap from WalMart when Americans actually stop making things. And it has nothing to do with robots. One of Reagan's first orders of business was to destroy the air traffic controllers' union. Not exactly robot work. Ronald Reagan hated the American worker, the same way that his political stepson, George W. Bush did.

And American workers as "leaches"? Your absolute disdain for the American worker is as notable as Reagan's and Bush's.

Sending American jobs overseas and cutting wages and benefits helps "the American consumer, especially the poor" in only one way. Under Ronald Reagan, the number of families living below the poverty line increased by a third. During George W. Bush's presidency, the number of poor people in America increased by 4.4 million. Ronald Reagan and his protege George W. Bush 'helped' the poor by making millions more of them.

Ronald Reagan's legacy is the financial disaster that is all around us. Now it's up the Barack Obama and the Democrats to fix it.

The Regan Model--minus the trade defict and military spending, The real change we need now

The primary reason Reagen had a debt is because he was the only president from the onset of the Cold War to directly challenge the USSR, and being the only one who finished what he started--as in he kept the pressure increasing throughout his time in office, never backing down. When he left office, due to that determination, he had put the Sovet economy in a state of chaos as it attempted, unsuccessfully to counter his agenda, while the papacy pushed for peaceful opposition in the Catholic east-bloc countries, eroding away the last bits of Soviet control.

His economic policies increased government revenue, created tens of millions of jobs and pulled the US out of the Carter recession. He also brought the American people back together and restored both national self confidence and patriotism. His re-election in 1984 was among the most lopsided in US history with Reagen getting 58% of the vote and all electoral votes save for DC and Minnesota, the latter having been lost by only around 10,000 votes. Other noteworthy domestic measures were his fights against Social Security and Medicare, both of which are attempts by the government to destroy the old closely nit communities where everyone sought to help out their neighbor and replace it with government power. The only things one can be critical about Reagen are with regard to the trade deficit, something which is un-sustainable.

Union leaching has been the primary factor in destroying the manufacturing industries in the US. Union workers believe they are entitled to big paychecks, massive benefits and a huge pension--all for doing unskilled labor that robots can now master. Unions had a time and a place in history, they were part of the cause and effect of the turbulent changing of an agricultural society to an industrialized one and protected the former farmers--now industrial workers, from abuse and exploitation. However following WWII, unions started to become obsolete with regard to their stated purposes and instead demanded the most money for the least work done. As mentioned, given that it was and is unskilled labor, that put them in a very bad situation economically as now they are considered disposable, as very few people will by 'American Made' if it costs twice as much as 'Made in China.'

Regan's 'anti-union' policies as some stated, were ultimately good for the American consumer, especially the poor, as they could buy things for less, thus letting them get more with the money they had and improving their standard of living. The 'tax cuts for the rich' were also good with regard to the economy, as they aloud more investing as well as more work being done with regard to cooperate competition to make things 'better, faster, cheaper.' As for the firing of the air traffic controllers, they stated in their contract that they wouldn't go on strike--yet they did. This made their contract null and void and they were rightfully relieved of their posts.

Yes to JMadison--Reagan's bad presidency

BIG government is what RR imposed on us as governor and President. As a ban-abortionist. he INCREASED taxes to hire people to make the civil government enforce church law that bans abortion. He himself represented Uncle Sam, sticking his nose under the sheets in every man's bedroom. He prevented taxes from being used overseas for family planning. That pleased employers who built factories in other nations and paid those over-breeding wretches starvation wages. He left the biggest national debt ever. We're still paying interest on loans Congress made to fight his Cold War. He's on record saying the pope guided his presidency. He was on the cover of Time magazine with the pope, bragging the two of them destroyed the USSR. After that, the Russian Mafia cheaply bought industries that were created under the nonprofit socialist system. As Governor and regent, he imposed tuition on our wonderful Land Grant Colleges. His banker pals still collect trillions of dollars interest on student loans. The assets of the GOP were stolen by anti-Labor, anti-Union Goldwater and by strike-breaker Reagan who fired air traffic controllers.

Rose colored glasses

drdan managed to disagree with me without even mentioning the central point of my post - that Ronald Reagan's 'ideals' are responsible for the mess the United States of American is in.

That's understandable. Spending our children's and grandchildren's money to purchase short term economic advantage for some is easy. Over the long term, however, it is inescapable that Ronald Reagan's policies are an abject disaster for the United States.

The primary reason that George H. W. Bush was not reelected was that Reaganomics had started to unravel. So we elected a Democrat, Bill Clinton, who got us back on the right track.

Unfortunately, Americans sometimes have short memories, and we elected a Reagan hyper-clone in George W. Bush. From January 20, 2001 until January 20, 2009 we got the "Reagan ideals" in spades. The GOP had the opportunity to prove the worth of Reagan's underlying principles. We proved, through hard experience, that those principles are a sure recipe for failure.

Look around at what has happened in the United States.

What we have going on is Ronald Reagan's legacy.

Ronald Reagan's policies were, are, and always will be a disaster for America.

Reagan

His ideals fixed America and the prosperity that followed was a direct result. It's amazing how people don't understand simple economics. Jimatmadison says redistributing as much wealth as possible to the rich. Nice class envy strategy because that is all you've got. The share of the income tax burden borne by the top 10 percent of taxpayers increased from 48.0 percent in 1981 to 57.2 percent in 1988. Meanwhile, the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers dropped from 7.5 percent in 1981 to 5.7 percent in 1988. The top 1% Pay Greater Dollar Amount in Income Taxes to Federal Government than Bottom 90%.

Also the fact that his budget and expenditures rose, I did some research and that is correct. Unfortunately that cannot be blamed on Congress because the Republicans controlled the Senate from 1981 to 1987. I will cut him some slack on that as we are not speaking Russian at this time.

Reagan was eternally optimistic at a time the nation needed him most and he spoke about America and it's greatness and didn't apologize to other nations for it. That is a fundamental difference. Also, when the Gipper gave a speech he didn't say I, he said the people of America or as the President of the United States. Think about that.

JimatMadisonWI's bogus comments

....is a typical liberal who refuses to acknowledge the 3 vital successes of the Reagan Presidency:

1) Revitalization of the American Economy after the Stagflation of Jimmy Carter

2) Destruction of the Soviet Union by subverting the Soviet system and bankrupting its government through working with the Western Allies (particularly Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain, and Pope John Paul II)

3) Restoring American optimism and patriotism while appealing to the American people to once again embrace American exceptionalism.

Of course, when liberals have colossal Presidential failures like LBJ and Jimmy Carter as role models, one can understand the derogatory remarks and leadership envy in their posts......

Reagan's "magic,"

Ron ray, & jimatmadison got it right. For a quarter-century, Reagan & Republican rhetoric talked the talk of smaller government & fiscal responsibility, but they never walked-the-walk. Their ideals were rhetoric, their actions irresponsible.

Reaganomics, as practiced, followed three principles, 1) Cut taxes, 2) Increase spending, 3) Borrow to make up the difference. Reagan's Republican successors didn't stray from those practiced ideals at all, they followed them explicitly.

The fundamental rule of economics, cutely stated, goes, "If your outgo exceeds your income, your upkeep will be your downfall." In plain language this means if you reduce your income, increase your expenditures, & borrow to make up the shortfall, you'll eventually go broke, & that's what Republican leadership did to America. Unfortunately, far too many of us followed their lead in our personal finances, & went broke too, on credit cards, sub-prime mortgages, & overpriced houses we really couldn't afford.

Reaganomics is a failed ideology & economic philosophy. Most Americans are wise to it now, & seek something else to draw us out of the doldrums. Republicans are going to have to come up with something other than this failed ideology if they expect Americans to follow them again.

"Reagan-style limits on government," were fiction. His "sunny optimism," was real enough, but it led us down a primrose path, & today the bills are coming due.