Deregulation would more directly effect wages then military spending levels. You can't be using that for the exuse of stagnant wages. Mediun wages were also stagnant under Clinton, and during that time Clinton cut military spending.
Deregulation has to be the reason, no question about that.
If it is inneficent then it IS harmful.Not always harmful, but always inefficient.
Heres my real world evidence.I'd say that our economy grew DESPITE that tariff. Real world evidence doesn't help either of us, but deduction helps me.
Economic reasons force me to be against all intervention.
After the War of 1812, government intervention was helpful. Therefore, there is one instance of benenficial government intervention... in a mixed economy.
Tariff of 1816
"The recently concluded War of 1812 forced Americans to confront the issue of protecting their struggling industries. The British had stashed large quantities of manufactured goods in warehouses during the war, but when peace was achieved in 1815, a flood of these goods was dumped on the American market. New England manufacturing concerns found it almost impossible to compete with the cheap foreign imports."