Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

HOW RONALD REAGAN SOWED THE SEEDS OF AMERICA'S DECLINE


No, we're not going to blame Bush here, although he deserves a lot of blame for the wretched problems we face now.  No.  Let's look at where the decline actually started--it started one "Morning in America," and has, except for Clinton's 8 years, been a slow descent into Debtor Nation status.  We don't know if Mr. Obama's policies can  undo the damage done by what Mr. Reagan started, because it's still too early in his presidency.  We DO know that the Obama administration has added jobs and we are in a babystep recovery of sorts, that is not as strong as I had hoped it would be.  A 9.5% unemployment is not good, but it is better than what it was under Reagan in the second year of his first term, when he was still blaming President Carter for the deep recession the US was in.

One other thing.  Mr. Reagan's approval ratings were in the low 40s.  And yet he went on to a second term.

"Ronald Reagan's approval rating was at 42 percent heading into his first midterm. In October 1982, the jobless rate moved from 9.8 to 10.1 percent. It was the highest rate since 1940. Reagan's recession, like today, was the worst downturn since the Great Depression. And this is a key reason comparisons between the two cycles have proven irresistible for many analysts.


That October 1982, the Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 57 percent of the voters said the country was on the "wrong track" (roughly equivalent to today's RCP "wrong track" average). Democrats began predicting 30 to 40-seat gains in the House. But Republican losses in the House were limited to 28 seats and the GOP retained its Senate majority."--SOURCE

 It's a bit early for the GOP to be crowing about anything, because Mr. Reagan proved that bad economic times can turn around.  Mr. Reagan also saw gains in Congress by the Democrats, which is normal, and will probably happen in November--the Republicans will gain seats in the House and Senate. 

But the polls continue to show that even though Mr. Obama's numbers are down a bit [latest 48% approval  +/- 3%--so he's about at 50% approval], he is head and shoulders above the public's opinion of the Congressional Democrats and far above Congressional Republicans, who are almosts at rock bottom in the opinion polls.

Now on to this piece I read on how President Reagan got us to where we are today:

"It has been over a year now since "The Great Recession" officially began, and yet even a basic understanding of the real causes of America's economic problems has still not emerged in the public. Indeed new movements have emerged touting as solutions to our current economic problems many of the very policy ideas that are actually the causes of our current economic problems. The rallying cry of conservatives across America has been a "return to the policies of Reagan!" The claim of many American conservatives has been that Ronald Reagan faced similar economic conditions when he was elected, and he was able to turn the economy around, so we need to return to the principles he used to reinvigorate the American economy.


The reality is that the economic policies of the "Reagan Revolution" have been in effect for the past three decades, and it is these very policies that have caused the economic situation that America finds itself in today.

During his first presidential campaign Ronald Reagan campaigned against government spending, he campaigned on reducing the national debt, he campaigned for individual responsibility, and he campaigned for broader American capital ownership.

The effects of his policies, however, had all of the exact opposite effects, and yet amazingly even today the vast majority of all Americans, especially conservatives, still believe Reagan's rhetoric and not the real effects of his policies.

In 1980 Reagan campaigned against what he called "out of control" deficit spending by the federal government. He identified the source of this "out of control" spending largely as social welfare programs. Shortly after taking office in 1981 Reagan gave a televised speech to the country in which he stated:

'By 1960 our national debt stood at $284 billion. Congress in 1971 decided to put a ceiling of 400 billion on our ability to borrow. Today the debt is 934 billion. ...

Here you see two trend lines. The bottom line shows the increase in tax revenues. The red line on top is the increase in government spending. Both lines turn upward, reflecting the giant tax increase already built into the system for this year 1981, and the increases in spending built into the '81 and '82 budgets and on into the future. As you can see, the spending line rises at a steeper slant than the revenue line. And that gap between those lines illustrates the increasing deficits we've been running, including this year's $80 billion deficit. Now, in the second chart, the lines represent the positive effects when Congress accepts our economic program. Both lines continue to rise, allowing for necessary growth, but the gap narrows as spending cuts continue over the next few years until finally the two lines come together, meaning a balanced budget. I am confident that my administration can achieve that. At that point tax revenues, in spite of rate reductions, will be increasing faster than spending, which means we can look forward to further reductions in the tax rates....

Our aim is to increase our national wealth so all will have more, not just redistribute what we already have which is just a sharing of scarcity. We can begin to reward hard work and risk-taking, by forcing this Government to live within its means. Over the years we've let negative economic forces run out of control. We stalled the judgment day, but we no longer have that luxury. We're out of time. ...

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America.'--Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981

The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

CONTINUE READING HERE.

8 comments:

(O)CT(O)PUS said...

Thank you. I have been saying this for a long time. Hopefully, when the last of the "Greed is Good" generation has died off, maybe there will be hope for this country at last.

Jerry Critter said...

That's a great article by R.G. Price, lot of good information. It clearly lays out how Reaganomics has put us in the place where we are.

Kevin Robbins said...

I certainly hope the reality of Reagan's incompetent and inhumane policies shine through someday and the veneration comes to an end. Thanks for the photo of that classic numberless graph.

Here's a Benen post that shows the GOP are still embracing the voodoo.

TOM said...

I have written this point over and over again.
It's simple Math, which I point out in my post last year, "Mondale Was Right"
It's no surprise that the selfish, lazy baby boomers would fall for such an old lie (free lunch) like the Republican "No New Taxes" chant.
As if we can build and maintain the greatest country in the World, and not have to pay for it.
It's taken less than 30 years to build a 13 trillion dollar debt. That debt must be paid off by the same generation who built it, before they die off.
Of course if rich people die this year, their benefactors do not have to pay the income tax (usually 55%) It's a one year only deal.
Quite a motivation for people to plan the untimely deaths of their rich relatives. Mysterious power outages at luxury nursing homes all over the country.

Arthurstone said...

GWB gets all the ink and of course his endless string of overseas disasters, domestic failures and sheer incompetence set him apart from the pack but in my view the very worst president I've ever had the misfortune to live under is Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Bar none.

The gee-willikers act annoyed me from the beginning and the nonsense he used to spout about his once upon a time being an FDR Democrat before the party 'left him behind' is very tough to gag down.

Like so many 'conservatives' he has his entire career been beholden to powerful (corporate) interests who have rewarded him very handsomely for services rendered. Far too many people, once they earn real money, seem to find their Liberal/Democrat days at an end.

There are myriad ways he made life for countless people around the globe and in our nation worse so I won't add to that discussion and I won't repeat them here.

He is the reason I stopped watching network newscasts back in 1981. I detest the man's ideas, thinking and policies. And I hated watching him deliver them on the teevee.

But tome the most unforgivable thing the man ever did was to utter these words: "this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Ripped from context they have become the rallying cry for generations of me-first conservatives, libertarians, states-righters and all the other subsets of greedy bastards who think of themselves as 'Real Americans'.

Sue said...

what a great post Shaw! The libertarians I know of who put Reagan on a pedestal need to wake up to the reality of what their "god" did to our nation! I'm gonna link this under my header and maybe silverfish will come by and read!

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ronald Reagan, campaigning for the re-election of Democratic President Harry Truman in 1948... "Tax-reduction bills have been passed to benefit the higher-income brackets alone".

(This is part of a much longer speech). What it shows is that Reagan got it. Or he used to. So what the hell happened?

When you reverse course 180 degrees you can't claim that your former Party "left you behind".

In regards to Palin and her use of the word "refudiate"... It's in the Urban Dictionary.

dmarks said...

""Tax-reduction bills have been passed to benefit the higher-income brackets alone"."

I could see why Reagan did not like that. And his own tax cuts were for all taxpayers.