Carol again displays her total lack of economic comprehension.<quoted text>
Actually, it was doing just fine under Reagan after Carter's recession and again under Bush after 9/11 all the way up until the housing bubble popped.
The Cold War, 9/11 and the housing market crisis weren't part of Supply-Side economics.
They were just realities that had to be dealt with.
Sure wish you guys could get that through your heads.
She again follows whatever she is told on FAUX.
"Why the GOP Won't Admit Supply-Side Econ Has Failed
Read more at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2012/12...
"he Republican Party has long promoted itself as the party of business. Republicans understand the needs of business, we are told, and if the country would leave the economy in their hands business would boom. All we need to do is to give those at the very top of the income distribution – the “job creators”– more income through tax breaks, and then sit back and wait for the magic happen. Our investment in the wealthy will produce remarkable economic growth, and everyone will be better off.
The Bush tax cuts were a test of these claims about supply-side economic policies. To justify the tax cuts the nation was, in effect, given a business prospectus from the Republican Party. We were promised that cutting taxes on the wealthy would result in much higher economic growth and broadly shared prosperity. For those who wondered how we would pay for such a large cut to the government’s revenue stream, the Republican prospectus had a remarkable claim. The tax cuts wouldn’t cost us anything. Growth would be so strong that the tax cuts would more than pay for themselves. Even those who admitted that the tax cuts might not be fully self-financing still made strong claims about faster economic growth offsetting much of the lost revenue from the tax cuts.
The reality, of course, has been quite different. There is little evidence that the Bush tax cuts, or any other tax cuts directed at the so-called job creators, have had a noticeable effect on economic growth. And the promise of broadly shared prosperity has not been realized. Most of the gains from economic growth in recent decades have gone to the top of the income distribution while the inflation adjusted wages of the working class have been relatively flat. Furthermore, the tax cuts have not paid for themselves as promised, and it hasn’t even been close. The Bush tax cuts have already cost us trillions in revenue, and if they are extended for high income tax payers, they will cost us roughly another trillion over the next decade.
A true party of business would end our investment in the false promise of supply-side economics. However, a party with a goal of reducing the scale of programs such as Social Security and Medicare along with delivering tax cuts to wealthy political backers would use arguments about the economic effects of tax cuts to disguise its true intentions. Which description fits best? Many Republicans still claim that tax cuts for the wealthy enhance economic growth despite the evidence to the contrary, but it’s rare to hear a Republican admit that these supply-side policies have failed."
It's truly funny to watch a dirt poor person like Carol defending perks for the wealthy, even as she has to buy used furniture and crappy used vehicles because she can't afford better.
But then, she's also a smoker who spent much time and effort defending smokers rights and decrying the fact that smokers are social outcasts. Then she tried to sell the idea that she's a former smoker!!
The woman will lie about anything. She's been caught in lots of lies on this thread. Willful lies, not mistakes.
Lots of weird stuff going on in her head.
That's why she's Carol and Lorac. She's got everything ass-backwards.