zzz
Quote:
By the end of the summer of Reagan's third year in office, the economy was soaring. The GDP growth rate was 5% and racing toward 7%, even 8% growth.
The article talks up SOARING GROWTH but those numbers
are typical for the entire postwar period. Do we say Clinton is an economic genius because he saw higher growth?
So...where's the evidence Reagan is causally responsible for any improvement in the economy?
GDP doesn't tell the whole story either. Does the rich getting richer mean life gets better for anyone else? Idk, go ask Marie Antoinette. Most Americans continued to see their lives get worse during the 80s.
Quote:
In any case, what Reagan inherited was arguably a more severe financial crisis than what was dropped in Mr. Obama's lap.
Did he inherit a war on two fronts? Or the kind of serious imbalance there is between China and the US?
Quote:
But that borrowing financed a remarkable and prolonged economic expansion and a victory against the Evil Empire in the Cold War.
LOOK OUT GUYS ITS A COLD WAR ZOMBIE
OMFG WTB SILVER BULLETS
Soviet Union collapsed from within. Even arguing that the US directly caused the fall of the Soviets - which it didn't - are we better off - or spending less on the military now - with the Soviets gone?
This is really what this whole article is about. A bunch of unsourced "quotations" and Mark Twain statistics from a propaganda-spewing Reagan zombie. And as we see, it works on people who think they're really clever and on the inside track even though the hard facts and data show clearly it's all a lot of bull.
Reagan didn't end the national depression. The Information Revolution did, and only temporarily. Presidents have very little power over the economy other than not fucking it up (which Reagan definitely did by running up huge debts).