Check your stats...

Post #6,362 by bepatient 8/22/01 4:13:39 PM Reply	Check your stats... ...the 2 largest tax cuts in the modern age (Reagan and Kennedy) resulted in INCREASES in government revenue. And it can be simply turned around in your argument to say that the Democrat's response to these increases in government revenue was to add more unecessary government programs to spend all of the money (and more). It is a simple thing to armchair quarterback government spending...but 2 graduate level econ classes with about 2000 pages of text barely scratch the surface. Unfortunately for you...later in life you are probably going to hear over and over again about how the policies of REAGAN were responsible for the largest, longest period of economic growth in US history. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #6,451 by mmoffitt 8/23/01 12:07:34 PM Reply	Revisionist History I am familiar with. I spent 4th Grade in the USSR. I have no doubt that some "economists" like Bowden for instance, will rewrite history. If Reagan is responsible for the growth in the 90's, why didn't it happen under Dubya's Daddy? Remember Clinton's signs: "It's the Economy, Stupid"? No matter what rw zealots, or revisionist historians say, the facts will always remain: 1. When Reagan took office, the US was the world's leading creditor nation. 2. By the end of his first term, the US was a debtor nation. 3. By the end of his second term, the US was the world's leading debtor nation. From World's Largest Creditor to World's Largest Debtor and you call that "economic success"? Embrace double-speak that well, do you? It's surprising to me that even in light of the above facts, Stockman's admission that Supply-Side could not work and that they knew it, Dubya's Daddy his ownself calling it "Voodoo economics", all this (and more), you can still find people who support Reaganomics. UN-BELIEVE-ABLE!
Post #6,500 by bepatient 8/23/01 2:42:17 PM Reply	Heh.. Trying that with a statisitician, eh? I'm sure I could pick one indicator that would...on its own...make the economic picture look exactly opposite. And...IIRC...we are BOTH...leading debtor and creditor nation....that being we are the farthest in debt and we give out the most....BUT...how far away are we from maximizing our leverage potential based upon the value of GNP. You see...a certain amount of debt is considered sound financial policy. (not as much as accumulated in the Reagan years, mind you)...but more than the ZERO everyone leads you to believe it should be. And try and vilify the policy all you want...the economy will be more successful the further you remove government from it...and there isn't an economist on the planet that will tell you differently...because there isn't a school of thought that treats government spending as anything but a drain on the economic cycle. Government is inherently inefficient in the economic sense. So...Reagan's single biggest policy (and the Pres can only effect a minority of the economic indicators...the rest is Congress, Fed and other countries) was his tax policy..and THAT was successful...based in a large part on the theories you didn't read that were linked below. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #6,512 by mmoffitt 8/23/01 3:18:13 PM Reply	Minor Nit. >>...because there isn't a school of thought that treats government spending as anything but a drain on the economic cycle. Except for getting us out of a Depression, right? Or didn't the War Production Board have anything to do with ending the Great Depression? Like it or not, it was US Socialism that brought us out of the Great Depression.
Post #6,515 by bepatient 8/23/01 3:26:56 PM Reply	Not... ...it was World War II that brought us out of the Great Depression. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #6,523 by mmoffitt 8/23/01 4:12:57 PM Reply	Sort of, but not Xactly. The War Production Board put everyone to work and since no one was making any consumer products - everything went to the War effort, you had this build up of buying power that once the War was OVER, could be spent on consumer goods and industry converted.
Post #6,527 by bepatient 8/23/01 4:53:49 PM Reply	But giving credit to that.. ...as a "government program" is sort of like giving credit to NASA for creating the moon just because they landed there. War has a wonderful habit of spurring the economy...but giving credit to the program as "the way we got out of the depression" is only accurate if they started the war...not just benefitted from it happening. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #6,648 by mmoffitt 8/24/01 4:21:48 PM Reply	Disagree. The response to the War is what got us out, not the War itself.

Welcome to IWETHEY!