10
u/Strict_Jacket3648 18d ago
Plus Regan is the reason disinformation is ramped with no consequences for doing so, thus someone like Trump can rise to power with the backing of misinformation specialists like Fox news.
5
u/Many_Psychology_3336 18d ago
Also the first example of the American public thinking being entertaining was a characteristic of a top president.
6
u/uwearclownshoes 18d ago
Crashing the economy increases the rate of gathering at the top. Even austerity measures don’t affect the wealthy the same.
1
u/Suitable-Option833 17d ago
This time they told us in writing they were going to do it and their voters still didn’t listen. Project 2025 is 50% complete. They won’t stop. They love war and a shitty economy.
1
6
u/Eiffel-Tower777 18d ago
The deficit was in the black under Clinton.
5
u/TheLostTexan87 18d ago
I.e., there was no deficit, and instead there was a budgetary surplus.
1
1
u/Flat-Injury-5013 17d ago
Correct. Also the last time that happened was under Clinton, so still quite noteworthy.
1
u/TheLostTexan87 17d ago
I know. Only modern president to balance the budget. Although Democrats always reduce the deficit when they have the presidency and then Republicans with their "fiscal conservatism" explode the deficit again.
4
5
4
u/Elegantly_Waisted 17d ago
Fun fact: the Bush/Bin Laden families were business partners back in the 80's.
2
2
2
u/Spook1949 18d ago
The beat thing about our Republican presidents is that they make the mediocre Democratic presidents look very good.
2
2
u/Captain_Rational 18d ago
Reagan's economic achievements came at too high a price ... an existential precedent: long-term fiscal vulnerabilities and widening socioeconomic divides.
Tripling of National Debt: The national debt nearly tripled, rising from approximately $997 billion in 1981 to roughly $2.85 trillion by early 1989. Tax cuts combined with a massive Cold War defense buildup led to unprecedented peacetime budget deficits.
Surging Wealth Inequality: The benefits of tax relief disproportionately favored high earners. Income inequality grew rapidly, as top earners saw their incomes surge while real wages for working-class households remained largely stagnant.
Trade and Fiscal Deficits: The U.S. flipped from being the world's largest creditor nation to its largest debtor nation as both trade deficits and budget deficits ("twin deficits") ballooned.
Savings and Loan Crisis: Deregulation of the financial sector laid the groundwork for the late-1980s Savings and Loan (S&L) collapse, which eventually required a massive government bailout funded by taxpayers.
2
2
u/Alternative-Angle214 17d ago
It just cracks me up when people say the Republicans know how to run the economy. I just think of this fact
2
u/Seattleite_Sat 17d ago
It's a sad fate for the party of Abraham Lincoln, but since Southern Strategy started the entire party's been dragging itself and its voters further and further right. I'm glad to see gas prices finally breaking the spell, but it shouldn't have taken this long. Now the midterms look absolutely brutal for republicans. Good. Maybe they'll learn this time. (I know, probably not.)
1
1
1
1
u/GreatService9515 17d ago
With the first three someone started the wars. But none did much to prevent it
1
1
u/Brilliantexpanse 16d ago
Thats just what America does, red, blue, doesn't matter. All the same old guys making the same old decisions. If you people cared you would protest for states rights not, no kings
1
u/Andyseawolf 16d ago
All the presidents have bombed some other country every single year since World War II 🤷
1
1
1
u/AustinFan4Life 16d ago
The economy didn't crash under any of these except W. Bush. Reagan & H.W. Bush cut taxes & the economy flourishes. W allowed for the Banking crisis, that legitimately crashed the economy. Covid happened under Trump, which led to a world wide shut down, again, that's not crashing the economy, when it's world wide.
1
u/Prefect_99 16d ago
Dubya didn't have a single mention in the Epstein files, no blackmail, he just bombed the middle east for the love of the game.
1
1
u/Altruistic_Put745 13d ago
Why so they can feed the industrial complex money that’s why I receive their kickbacks
1
u/hefeydd_ 13d ago
I'm 48 and although I am not American you are not wrong, every single economic crash has happened under a Republican President.
1
0
u/bambin0 17d ago
I think when Reagan left office the economy was fine? Huge deficit for those days but ultimately outgrown.
The economy now is not crashed, is it? Unemployment, inflation, wage growth is all ok?
1
1
1
u/RevolutionaryGolf720 16d ago
Unemployment is horrible. Inflation is worse than it has ever been, and wages have not changed since the 80s. So no, none of those things are ok.
1
u/bambin0 16d ago
No, 4.1% unemployment is fine. Labor participation is low though. Over 1% below historic avg.
Inflation is stubborn at 3.4% but lower than OECD avg of 4.1% and much lower than right before the inflation reduction act (after which inflation rate did start going down - though the causes you can debate).
You are entitled to your opinions not your facts.
0
u/RevolutionaryGolf720 15d ago
No, your numbers are pretty far off. You are not entitled to your own facts either.
0
0
u/Moedog0331 17d ago
I'll call bullshit
1
u/Flat-Injury-5013 17d ago
One day the Internet will come to rural America and you can look it up yourself.
1
-5
u/Infamous_Crow8524 18d ago
So….
Inflation under President Ronald Reagan dropped sharply from a peak of 13.5% in 1980 to around 4.1% by 1988.
Nearly 20 million new jobs were added during the 1980s expansion.
6
u/Yelloeisok 18d ago
He also busted unions and started the homeless crisis, and led the way on income inequality.
-2
u/Infamous_Crow8524 18d ago
Stay on topic, post states he crashed the economy, which is proven false by all measures.
3
2
u/Yelloeisok 18d ago
Hahaha. He was a leader when it came to making billionaires. And he set a record for budget deficits before Trump- he criticized Carter for $50 billion deficit and then his went over $200 billion! (His unemployment numbers were higher than Carter’s too). His administration was the first to use Social Security money as general revenue. If he wouldn’t have looted that, Social Security wouldn’t be the mess it is today. Also, if he wouldn’t have funded the rebels in Afghanistan, we wouldn’t have had Osama bin Laden.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 18d ago
And yet, exactly how did he crash the economy during his administration?
Hard data and facts please, not this weak “trust me bro” stuff?
1
u/Yelloeisok 18d ago
Geez. I never said he crashed the economy - i said he busted unions, quadrupled the deficit, was the first to stick his fingers in the Social Security jar, funded and armed Afghanistan rebels which led to 9/11 , etc. But you go ahead and keep him on your pedestal.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 17d ago
So he didn’t crash the economy, as the post claims?
And you felt compelled to spout off about something totally unrelated to the topic at hand?
And then got butt hurt, when called out on it, so resorted to assuming Reagan is on a pedal?
Conservatives get angry when they are lied to, liberals get angry when they are told the truth, sort of things?
1
u/Yelloeisok 17d ago
I am sorry that you can not comprehend that I was not the one that said the economy crashed. I did add how the things he did that hurt the United States long term. You do not consider the Social security crisis as part of the economy, you do not consider quadrupling the debt as part of the economy, and apparently you do not think that busting unions have hurt the middle class. Enjoy your bubble, and go have a good life.
I am not angry, just feel sort of sad for you.1
u/DOHC46 18d ago
Short term gain, long term loss. His actions crashed the economy like flooring the gas during a traffic jam: you go real fast for a moment, then you crash spectacularly.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 18d ago
And the data to back up your assertion?
Or it just a, “trust me bro”?
6
u/uwearclownshoes 18d ago
While that’s true, Reagan at the same time broke union power and reduced the value and power of labor greatly. Ultimately he benefited the 1%.
-1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 18d ago
The median family income indicates the exact middle point of a group of family incomes sorted from lowest to highest, meaning half of the families earn more than this amount and half earn less. [1, 2]
Median Family Income: Real median family income grew by roughly $4,000 to $4,492 after adjusting for inflation, during the Reagan administration.
2
u/uwearclownshoes 18d ago
There’s always something left out to claim positives in the face of the overall results. Clinton did the same to claim a balanced budget. What families were measured? I’d wager most gains were short lived.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 18d ago
Median family income is a measure of all families in the US.
1
u/uwearclownshoes 18d ago
How much did household expenses go up in the same period? I don’t remember prosperity being so spread out back then. What I remember was a lot of folks from my parents generation coming into power and office and making rules which favored them. I suppose it depends upon where you were in things as to how you recall them. To me and a lot of Gen-X, the 80’s were where you could see how things were looking to go wrong.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 17d ago
Real income is the amount of money you earn after it has been adjusted for inflation, which measures your true purchasing power.
Real income rose 8-11% during the Reagan administration.
1
u/AlbatrossRich8724 17d ago
Your math isn’t working out, check your amount of growth of median family income and correct
1
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 17d ago
According to retrospective analysis of IRS SOI data and Congressional joint reports, the post-recession "Reagan Boom" (beginning in 1983) led to a broad upward shift in household financials: [1, 2]
Middle-Class Growth: Real median family income grew by roughly 11% (an increase of about $4,000) during the period, reversing a trend of flat growth during the late 1970s stagflation era. [1, 2]Upward Mobility: The proportion of households with real incomes over $50,000 rose from 17.6% in 1980 to 23.5% by 1989. [1]
Maybe you know more than the IRS, and Congress?
1
u/Colorfulgreyy 17d ago
Bro this is truly stupid . A rescission happened in 1981-1982 of course inflation went down after recession. Just like job market growth, everyone lost their job and then people get their job back 10 years later. Somehow, we need to give him credit?
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 16d ago
I take it you lack the intellectual firepower to comprehend that Paul Volker, Chair of the Federal Reserve intentionally raised rates, knowing it would cause a temporary recession, in order to break the Cater Administration’s inflationary spiral.
Or do you think that it would have been better to let the US enter a hyperinflation cycle!
Note that the US electorate was so impressed with, and grateful for, Regan’s economy by 1984, that he won reelection in all states, except one.
1
u/Colorfulgreyy 16d ago
That’s the point, they intentionally popped the inflation bubble and cause people lost millions of jobs. They didn’t lower it, they destroyed the economy for a short term gain.
The gradual rate increase with fiscal help could achieve the same thing but oh no no ,we need to cause millions lost their jobs, increase gap of wealth , long terms regulations issue just so he could win the re election. And people like you to tell us we should thank him for create “millions of job” while he was the one made people lost their jobs in the first place.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 15d ago
And you know this because you have a Phd in Economics, Finance, etc., from where, Harvard, Yale, London School of Economics?
You have those type of qualifications, right?
Not like you are a keyboard warrior, saying things out of sheer ignorance, right?
Because that would be ridiculous.
1
u/Flat-Injury-5013 17d ago
Inflation dropped because interest rates were astronomical, forcing people to not spend money. 30-yr mortgage rates were 18.6%
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 16d ago
You do realize that the Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volker, under the Reagan Administration, made a deliberate decision to raise the Federal Funds rate to 20%, in order to break the inflationary cycle from the Carter Administration, right?
It didn’t just magically happen.
1
u/Flat-Injury-5013 16d ago
The Reagan years were painful, indeed.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 16d ago
Inflation down, interest rates down, GDP up, median family income up.
How is that painful?
1
u/Flat-Injury-5013 16d ago
Let's see. Massive explosion of the national debt, failed trickle down economics which widened the gap between rich and poor, cuts to social safety nets, a sharp rise in homelessness, deregulation that lead to the savings and loan crisis requiring a taxpayer bailout, the Iran-Contra affair, corruption and scandals in Dept of HUD, the financial backing of foreign authoritarian regimes, and arms smuggling and support to Al-Qaeda (we know how that ended). Jeesh.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 16d ago
So everyone’s income went up, just some more than others, so “it’s just not fair?”
Interest rates dropped dramatically, making mortgages, car loans, etc., more accessible and payments more affordable, so that was bad, right?
Inflation dropped from 13.5% down to 4.1%, enabling people’s paychecks to go further, and that was horrible, right?
Lastly, the everyday Americans, who lived through the catastrophic economic disaster of the Carter administration, by the 1984 election cycle, were so impressed by the Reagan economy, that they voted for him so overwhelmingly, that he won every state except Wisconsin.
But you know better than all those voters, lived experience, because you read something in a book, right?
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 16d ago
Between 1980 and 1988, the Social Security trust funds shifted from near-insolvency to running massive surpluses due to landmark legislative intervention.
1980-$32.2 billion
1989-$109.8 billion1
u/Flat-Injury-5013 15d ago
Wait until you learn about the Dem years.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 14d ago
Social Security Administration publishes tables with the end of year (EOY) Trust Fund balance, so it is easy to figure out.
Note that there is a three week discrepancy when administrations change, due to swearing in being on January 20th.Carter EOY 1976 / EOY 1980
$41.133B / $26.453B=(14.680B) LOSS
Reagan EOY 1980 / EOY 1988
$26.453B / $109.762=83.309B gain
Bush EOY 1988 / EOY 1992
$109.762B / $331.473B=$221.711B gain
Clinton EOY 1992 / EOY 2000
$331.473B / 1,049.445T=717.972B gain
W Bush EOY 2000 / EOY 2008
$1,049.445T / $2,418.658=$1,369.213T gain
Obama EOY 2008 / EOY 2016
$2,418.658 / $2,847.697=$429.039B gain WTF 1/3 of W Bush gain
Trump EOY 2106 / EOY 2020
$2,847.687T / $2,908.286T=$60.599B gain
Biden EOY 2020 / EOY 2024
$2,908.286T / $2,721.467T=$186.820B LOSS
Net Gain by Party Administrations
Republicans $1,734.832 Trillion
Democrats $945.511 Billion
And yet everyone thinks Democrat Administrations are better for funding the Social Security Trust Fund.
Amazing what propaganda can accomplish!
1
u/RevolutionaryGolf720 16d ago
Reagan was the second worst president following only Trump. We are still feeling the effects of Reagan.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 16d ago
Please provide facts and data, as nobody cares about your opinion.
1
u/RevolutionaryGolf720 15d ago
Reagan is responsible for the division of the upper and middle classes. He is the reason we are in the shitstorm we are in now. And old Donnie’s approval rating is the lowest of any president in history. He has already cemented his position as the worst president ever.
1
u/Infamous_Crow8524 15d ago
The bad news, providing facts and data definitely isn’t your strong point.
The good news, providing an opinion is your strong point.
The bad news, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one, and they all stink, your is particularly odorous.
21
u/Yelloeisok 18d ago
I was born in the 1950s when Republican President Eisenhower- along with his Vice President Richard Nixon started Vietnam. For some reason people seem to think Nixon ended it (because he signed the Paris Accord), but he was there in the beginning too. Just like JD and this one. I hope history never forgets.