Reagan's Economy
Spokesman for the Clinton campaign, one-time economist, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman attempts to denounce Barack Obama for even mentioning Ronald Reagan without espousing anger and hatred towards "history's greatest monster". Krugman's complaint:
Since I have access to the internet, I thought I would take five minutes to check Krugman's facts, which are all misleading (I can't call them false, because it is unclear what he is measuring. Some point in the late 1980's to some point a decade earlier? Is he comparing the Reagan economy to what it was before stagflation under Jimmy Carter? )The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen.
Under Reagan (1981-1989)
- The poverty rate fell from 14% to 11.8%
- Family poverty fell from 11.2% to 10.3%
- The middle 20% of households' income - in inflation-adjusted, 2006 dollars - rose from a range of $32,000 - $49,000 to $36,000 - $55,000
3 comments:
Reagan's deficit spending ($3 trillion plus)now contributes to the inflation (2008)in the U.S.
Why is it "Reagan's deficit spending"?
CONGRESS sets tax and spending levels, NOT the president. The MOST a president can do is to INFLUENCE Congressional decisions with the threat to veto - which is a watered-down threat when Congress ROUTINELY sets up spending bills with a ton of non-related items in them.
Give the President an EXPLICIT "Line Item" veto, and you'd see a LOT of pork spending evaporate.
Reagan's the Wrong Scapegoat for Market Crisis read more here
Post a Comment