quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I don't think I'd call Regan a "diamond in the rough." EDIT: Uhh, nevermind... I somehow managed to misread that. I made the same mistake with those damn NIST reports!

Did you file your TPS reports with the new coversheets?

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

Reagan was president from 81-89 - look at the national debt:




notwithstanding any foreign policy issues, his policies are having a lasting impact today - he was horrible for this country.

I agree with jerZ07002, Reagan's legacy is one of trillions of dollars worth of debt.

We're still paying for it -- to the tune of maybe as much as $100 billion per year, although I admit it's a ballpark figure more than a serious attempt at sorting out what portion of the debt various presidents are responsible for. And that's just the non-discretionary annual interest payments. Until we pay down the trillions worth of principal by raising taxes and or cutting spending to produce a surplus that amounts to trillions, we'll being paying that every year, indefinitely.

In the end Reagan's policies will cost tens of trillions of dollars (we may already be at the thirteen figure mark, or close), and that's ignoring gains that could have otherwise been realized on those trillions of dollars that are instead taxed to pay for those debts or, alternately, real improvements in the lives of people that the government could have produced by spending an equivalent amount on social programs rather than debt interest.

No matter how you slice it, it's an absolutely dreadful legacy. Reagan deserves serious consideration as the worst president ever -- yes, even knowing that Dubya exists. He was that bad.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 Reagan was president from 81-89 - look at the national debt:

Well yea, "Reganomics" ring any bells?

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

Aren't the Republicans supposed to be the ones that cut spending, and the Democrats the ones that spend spend spend on services? I notice that Reagabush massively increased the public debt, Clinton lowered it significantly and now Bush has increased it again. That's hardly the pattern you'd expect from typical right wing or left wing economics! Now there is something obvious I'm thinking about - defence spending - but surely that cannot be that huge as to increase the debt (or decrease in Clinton's case) like that can it?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Aren't the Republicans supposed to be the ones that cut spending, and the Democrats the ones that spend spend spend on services? I notice that Reagabush massively increased the public debt, Clinton lowered it significantly and now Bush has increased it again. That's hardly the pattern you'd expect from typical right wing or left wing economics! Now there is something obvious I'm thinking about - defence spending - but surely that cannot be that huge as to increase the debt (or decrease in Clinton's case) like that can it?

Interesting, innit? For all the Republicans cry about raising taxes, they are the ones living beyond our means.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Interesting, innit? For all the Republicans cry about raising taxes, they are the ones living beyond our means.

So they cut taxes and increase spending!? Lol!

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley So they cut taxes and increase spending!? Lol!

You've hit on the precise reason I'm befuddled by how fiscal conservatives can support a candidate like George W. Bush or John McCain.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r We really can't use today's political mind-think to judge yesterday's when the mindset was so totally different - it's just wrong. It's like saying that dropping the atomic bomb on Japan was wrong without realizing WHY it was done at the time. (i.e. saving a LOT of allied lives vs. a full on invasion of Japan). Time has a way of warping yesterday's actions without putting it into the context of that time. The Russians btw were simply out-spent so you're right in one way Krypton, they did do it do themselves in that they spent all their resources in a 'keeping up with the Jones's' arms race they could never afford to begin with, and to the detriment of everyone under their banner.

Yup, well said.

It's known as the "historian's fallacy". It's still important to do this, to redefine your values, but context is always valuable.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Well yea, "Reganomics" ring any bells?

of course it does - i spent four years of my life studying finance. It's amazing how conversatives consider themselves 'fiscally responsible' yet since WWII only republicans have increase the federal debt burden.

I don't get the republican calculus: lower taxes + increased spending = balanced budget.

What do they spend the money on that the Democrats don't anyway??

Blowing shit up.

___________________
I've never been able to eat a whole baby.
Kill the women. Eat the children.
It's just one of those days where you want to bend over everyone you know and kiss their ass goodbye with a big sideways boot.

Latest Mix