Reaganomics A Failure

Reaganomics A Failure

Posted in the Utica Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#1 Feb 2, 2014
Clearly, 30 years of ridiculously low Tax rates for the wealthy has not created any "Trickledown" not even a "Drip". Reagan's policies combined with Clinton's disastrous trade agreements and welfare reform, have decimated the Middle Class.

We need to roll back the Reagan Tax Cuts, and abandon these "Free Trade" agreements and go back to the Protectionist Trade policies that made us the manufacturing power house that we were for 200 years.
Ben Gleck

Utica, NY

#3 Feb 2, 2014
Bodhisatva wrote:
Clearly, 30 years of ridiculously low Tax rates for the wealthy has not created any "Trickledown" not even a "Drip". Reagan's policies combined with Clinton's disastrous trade agreements and welfare reform, have decimated the Middle Class.
We need to roll back the Reagan Tax Cuts, and abandon these "Free Trade" agreements and go back to the Protectionist Trade policies that made us the manufacturing power house that we were for 200 years.
AMEN BROTHER!!! Have you checked out Thom Hartman's new book, The Crash of 2016

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#4 Feb 3, 2014
Wow !!!

At least we stopped blaming all the country's problems on Bush. Now we are going back 30 years to find a scapegoat.
Nope

Philadelphia, PA

#6 Feb 3, 2014
Libertards Lies wrote:
Liberals simply can't deny: Any place Democrats and Libertards mass like NY, Ca, Detroit & Boston end up in poverty and bankruptcy.
If you see a photo of a ghetto, it is always a Democratically held region.
NY Detroit & Ca, where libertard liars ruled for 30+ years prove Liberalism is simply deceit, race baiting and lies in order to maintain power. The facts simply say it all. Anyone who goes around claiming liberalism is anything but a century old failure is full of shyt and should be put down for being that ignorant and spreading lies for self gain again.
Oneida Co is a good example of what happens when you have know-it-all loser dems running the show 30 years. You deserve what you ended up with if you losers stayed there.
Now swig that phony koolaid!
Truth.
Truth

Utica, NY

#7 Feb 3, 2014
Bodhisatva wrote:
Clearly, 30 years of ridiculously low Tax rates for the wealthy has not created any "Trickledown" not even a "Drip". Reagan's policies combined with Clinton's disastrous trade agreements and welfare reform, have decimated the Middle Class.
We need to roll back the Reagan Tax Cuts, and abandon these "Free Trade" agreements and go back to the Protectionist Trade policies that made us the manufacturing power house that we were for 200 years.
So what you are saying is that you want to take money from some people and give it to other people who you think need it.

If you went into your neighbor's house and took a tv from them because you thought they had too many and gave that tv to another neighbor who had no tv you'd end up in jail. Why then is it ok for the government to do very much the same thing?

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
― Margaret Thatcher .

As for the original post, please have a look at this. It's interesting and has some facts that seem to run counter to what you said:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011...
"These (Reagan's) economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.

During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."
Nope

Philadelphia, PA

#8 Feb 3, 2014
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you are saying is that you want to take money from some people and give it to other people who you think need it.
If you went into your neighbor's house and took a tv from them because you thought they had too many and gave that tv to another neighbor who had no tv you'd end up in jail. Why then is it ok for the government to do very much the same thing?
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
&#8213; Margaret Thatcher .
As for the original post, please have a look at this. It's interesting and has some facts that seem to run counter to what you said:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011...
"These (Reagan's) economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.
During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."
Don't blind the ignorant with facts.
dummypants

United States

#9 Feb 4, 2014
Bodhisatva wrote:
Clearly, 30 years of ridiculously low Tax rates for the wealthy has not created any "Trickledown" not even a "Drip". Reagan's policies combined with Clinton's disastrous trade agreements and welfare reform, have decimated the Middle Class.
We need to roll back the Reagan Tax Cuts, and abandon these "Free Trade" agreements and go back to the Protectionist Trade policies that made us the manufacturing power house that we were for 200 years.
Any minute now, all that money at the top will start trickling down to the working class.
Just wait, it will hapen soon.
Nope

Philadelphia, PA

#10 Feb 4, 2014
dummypants wrote:
<quoted text>
Any minute now, all that money at the top will start trickling down to the working class.
Just wait, it will hapen soon.
...you mean with obamas plan?

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#11 Feb 6, 2014
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you are saying is that you want to take money from some people and give it to other people who you think need it.
If you went into your neighbor's house and took a tv from them because you thought they had too many and gave that tv to another neighbor who had no tv you'd end up in jail. Why then is it ok for the government to do very much the same thing?
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
&#8213; Margaret Thatcher .
As for the original post, please have a look at this. It's interesting and has some facts that seem to run counter to what you said:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011...
"These (Reagan's) economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.
During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."
While you may be gullible enough to believe the rewritten Reagan History, Quoting Maggie Thatcher does less than nothing to support your case.
Reagan TRIPLED our national debt. If borrowing and spending was a good replacement for Taxing and spending is a discussion worth having.
We had 50 years of middle class growth following FDR's "New Deal" We have now had 30 years of middle class stagnation and decimation, a SINGLE middle class income was sufficient to support a family, including owning a Home, taking a modest vacation, and retiring with a reasonable level of dignity, That is the way our middle class was living during the 50's 60's 70's and early 80's.
Now in this post "Reagan Revolution" America, It takes 2 incomes or MORE just to tread water, we now have greater personal debt than ever in history,$Trillion in Credit card debt.$Trillion in Student Loan debt. For Gods sake, we are convincing our Senior Citizens to consider "Reverse Mortgages" so they can live in comfort.
If this is OK with you, I suggest you think long and hard about where you and your friends and family will be in the years to come.
And just for the record. "We the People" have decided which things we should do to promote the "General Welfare" and we pay for those things AS A GROUP through Taxes.
Turning it into a Bumper Sticker, "Take money from some people to give to other people" is Moronic.
Nope

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Feb 6, 2014
Poor Bod wrote:
Another ridiculous liveral pile of rants and lies above.
Why does Bod even post anymore after all that has happened with the Dems? Oh wait I forgot he's a loser stuck in handout NY and probably lives on the dole hence just like the UPD trolls here he feels a need to protect his gravytrain.
Steely Dan? Says it all!
True.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#14 Feb 7, 2014
Poor Bod wrote:
Another ridiculous liveral pile of rants and lies above.
Why does Bod even post anymore after all that has happened with the Dems? Oh wait I forgot he's a loser stuck in handout NY and probably lives on the dole hence just like the UPD trolls here he feels a need to protect his gravytrain.
Steely Dan? Says it all!
Typical lack of specificity, Lies? All that has happened with the Dems?? Once again, excellent specifics!
If you could actually read and understand English, you would have been able to comprehend my point that Clinton(Dem) was partly responsible for our current state of affairs due to NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO.
MY Country was founded with the Idea that we are all in this TOGETHER, you have a twisted view of what OUR Government is for. You have allowed the Corporate Fascist media to convince you to be Un American.
I do not want to be a Wealthy Man in Poor Country.
Truth

Utica, NY

#15 Feb 7, 2014
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>Typical lack of specificity, Lies? All that has happened with the Dems?? Once again, excellent specifics!
If you could actually read and understand English, you would have been able to comprehend my point that Clinton(Dem) was partly responsible for our current state of affairs due to NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO.
MY Country was founded with the Idea that we are all in this TOGETHER, you have a twisted view of what OUR Government is for. You have allowed the Corporate Fascist media to convince you to be Un American.
I do not want to be a Wealthy Man in Poor Country.
You are wrong historically when you say "MY Country was founded with the Idea that we are all in this TOGETHER". if you are talking about the United States. Let me be very specific using very relevant examples.

James Madison is known as the Father of the Constitution. He's known as that because he was the main author. He's also one of the three authors of the Federalist. In Federalist 45 he wrote about what the "general welfare" means and about what part the proposed federal government would play in "providing for the general welfare". You can read it but needless to say it is contrary to your interpretation of our founding principles. As our fourth president, Madison vetoed a public works bill called "An act to set apart and pledge certain funds for internal improvements". It was a bill that called for federal funding for roads, bridges and canals. He vetoed it not because he thought it was a bad idea but because he couldn't find where the constitution said the federal government had the power to do such a thing. Take a look:
http://www.constitution.org/jm/18170303_veto....
Using logic then please tell me how, if the main author of the US Constitution couldn't find the power to fund roads, bridges and canals, could the federal government by virtue of the founding principles find the power to redistribute wealth (charity).

More on point is fourteenth president, Franklin Pierce's veto of a bill called "An act making a grant of public lands to the several States for the benefit of indigent insane persons". Again, like Madison he didn't say it wasn't a good idea. He said he couldn't find where the US Government had been granted the power to do such a thing. That is redistribution of wealth(charity). So much for "we are all in it together".

How about 22nd and 24th President Grover Cleveland's veto of a bill called " An Act to enable the Commissioner of Agriculture to make a special distribution of seeds in drought-stricken counties of Texas, and making an appropriation therefore". In it he said this:
"I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people."
Does that sound like he thought the founding principles and constitution said "we are all in it together"?

I've given you very specific example that disprove your reading of history. Everything changed dramatically after FDR obviously. It changed because FDR was able to bully the Supreme Court after they told him that many facets of the "New Deal" were unconstitutional. You can look up and read about his proposed court packing scheme. He was a bully and in many ways just like President Obama in that regard.

Our country was not founded on a "we are all in this together" principle. It was founded on a "we've had enough of an over-reaching tyrannical government and we want as little government interference in our lives" principle.
Truth

Utica, NY

#16 Feb 7, 2014
Bodhisatva wrote:
<quoted text>Typical lack of specificity, Lies? All that has happened with the Dems?? Once again, excellent specifics!
If you could actually read and understand English, you would have been able to comprehend my point that Clinton(Dem) was partly responsible for our current state of affairs due to NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO.
MY Country was founded with the Idea that we are all in this TOGETHER, you have a twisted view of what OUR Government is for. You have allowed the Corporate Fascist media to convince you to be Un American.
I do not want to be a Wealthy Man in Poor Country.
If you "do not want to be a Wealthy Man in Poor Country" then sell everything you have and send it in to the government for redistribution but don't for a minute think that you and people like you have the right to force that philosophy down the throats of your fellow U.S. citizens. As I proved in my last post, that is not what our country was founded on.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#18 Feb 7, 2014
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong historically when you say "MY Country was founded with the Idea that we are all in this TOGETHER". if you are talking about the United States. Let me be very specific using very relevant
Using logic then please tell me how, if the main author of the US Constitution couldn't find the power to fund roads, bridges and canals, could the federal government by virtue of the founding principles find the power to redistribute wealth (charity).
More on point is fourteenth president, Franklin Pierce's veto of a bill called "An act making a grant of public lands to the several States for the benefit of indigent insane persons". Again, like Madison he didn't say it wasn't a good idea. He said he couldn't find where the US Government had been granted the power to do such a thing. That is redistribution of wealth(charity). So much for "we are all in it together".
How about 22nd and 24th President Grover Cleveland's veto of a bill called " A
"I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly
Does that sound like he thought the founding principles and constitution said "we are all in it together"?
I've given you very specific example that disprove your reading of history. Everything changed dramatically after FDR obviously. It changed because FDR was able to bully the Supreme Court after they told him that many facets of the "New Deal" were unconstitutional. You can look up and read about his proposed court packing scheme. He was a bully and in many ways just like President Obama in that regard.
Our country was not founded on a "we are all in this together" principle. It was founded on a "we've had enough of an over-reaching tyrannical government and we want as little government interference in our lives" principle.
Our Country was founded on the principles of self governance rather than Monarchy, Based on the enlightenment.
Madison rebuked the notion of being called "The Father of the Constitution" and The Federalist was merely the writings used by the founders to "Sell" the Constitution to the States to get it ratified. Much of it was purposefully written in the most ambiguous terms possible in order to include a wider variety of view points.(not unlike conservadems watering down the ACA to get it passed).
I always enjoy the cherry picking fashion with which my conservative and libertarian friends show their Love for the Founders.
Pointing to 3 Presidents out of 44 who agree with you does not carry the day with me, Sorry.

FDR made huge changes, that is true, we went 50 years without a Bank failure thanks to FDR, we had 50 years of middle class growth thanks to FDR.
I wish we could elect another President who would stand up to the Supreme court like FDR did(it worked quite well).
There is the Tyranny folks like you so fear, The Supreme Court has taken on powers not granted them by the Constitution, Judicial review, striking down laws passed by congress, proclaming money is protected by the 1st amendment and corporations are protected by the 14th.

Folks like you always seem to forget a very important Fact, We are our Government and our Government is Us.
.
I suggest you re read the preamble to the Constitution.(take note Welfare is capitalized defense is not)

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#19 Feb 7, 2014
Poor Bod wrote:
<quoted text>Huh? AwFuckYouAsshole! " "Specificity"?! "SPECIFICITY"?!! After years of lies, liberal talking points, blaming bush yadafuckinyada it's no problem for anyone who reads yourshitto see that you're a phony loose fckin screw moron without a fiber of credibility on this, and I'm sure on a any other forum. You're not worth thefuckin TIME youasshole! You'll just flip zip over to some other bullshit and try to start " professorizing " in some other Democrat Party-think nutcase rant. You clearly have an acutely lefty OUTLANDISH world-view and the arrogance to match. You're the drunk making no sense that think he can kick everyone's ass in the room. You're old. You work for the government and adore the current status quo. It makes no difference to me I kind of like that anasshole like you is riding the blint end of a lawn dart into the dirt up there. Have a great ride yafuckinknowitall! Whatever you say oh prophet of liberal salvation!:-)
You're like a half a clown show Joe.
Holy Crap! I think you may have a drinking problem.
Or perhaps it's just a thinking problem. Either way, may I suggest you get a grip?

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#20 Feb 7, 2014
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
If you "do not want to be a Wealthy Man in Poor Country" then sell everything you have and send it in to the government for redistribution but don't for a minute think that you and people like you have the right to force that philosophy down the throats of your fellow U.S. citizens. As I proved in my last post, that is not what our country was founded on.
So do you believe you should each build our own roads? Or should we pool our resources build the roads together and share them?

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#21 Feb 7, 2014
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
If you "do not want to be a Wealthy Man in Poor Country" then sell everything you have and send it in to the government for redistribution but don't for a minute think that you and people like you have the right to force that philosophy down the throats of your fellow U.S. citizens. As I proved in my last post, that is not what our country was founded on.
There's an old joke. Man says to a Woman, "would you come home with me for $million?" the Woman hesitates for a minute and says Yes! then the Man says "would you come home with me for $50?" and the woman slaps him and says "what kind of Woman do you think I am?" the Man says, "we've already established what kind of woman you are, now we are negotiating the price"

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#23 Feb 7, 2014
Clipper yanks his johnson wrote:
More left wing drivel.
Yup, left wing drivel for sure......Stagnant Wages, record high poverty, record high personal debt, record high corporate profits, record high CEO pay.
USA USA USA
We're Number One!!!!!
For the first time since this Nations inception we are #1
As the Nation with the LOWEST level of upward mobility among all industrialized nations. Morons.

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#24 Feb 7, 2014
Reagan started the War on Education in California.
Now our College Graduates are blessed with mountainous debt.

Thanks Ronnie!!

Level 7

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#25 Feb 7, 2014
Reagan put the War on Organized Labor into overdrive.
Now we have no pensions, we have 401k's that we cant afford to fund and are insufficient to retire on.
We have record #s of people under employed(working poor)

Thanks Ronnie!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
NEW Democratic Party Election Commissoner 3 min Great News 26
Keller 9 min Suggestion Box 31
Vagatucci's OCJ Yelp Review 11 min Jim Martin Design... 5
Mario Pass' - Life Styles of the Broke and Conv... 13 min Passavagatucci 1
Holland Farms Ripoff JellyBuns 16 min laquisha 8
Johnny Weir Disgusting 23 min ade3s 15
Utica/Labella to court with Longo $100M (Sep '13) 35 min all nonsense 32
Kim Strong rescue in Brookfield? 1 hr Up North 67
the hookers are out its warm 2 hr Uglychris 51
Best head in Utica?!? 9 hr herk magician 53
How Much Does H & R Block charge To Do Your Taxes (Jan '09) 12 hr Credit carma freebie 1,020

Utica Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Utica Mortgages