It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911
What he did was not close to what Obama is doing, and it's also not going to high-risk ventures that will create larger deficits in the long run. Reagan's investment created what is called "smart debt", and in that sense the investment didn't outpace inflation to the point where the real numbers were smaller than the nominal ones when placed on the current valuation model. In addition, Reagan didn't open a checkbook to deprivatize a good chunk of the GDP.Originally Posted by obvious child
I meant preemptive as in "during the bubble but before the burst", but not "before a bubble starts". That would be wasteful spending on a crapshoot. It has worked in the past to minimize fallout. The '87 crash was a prime example. The fallout from the stock market barely caused a ripple, even though that, when updated for inflation and TVM, was just as big and probably a little bit bigger than in '29 when the whole country went ape****. When he cushioned the real estate bubble that was forming in the mid 80s, he did a lot to soften the blow when the crap eventually hit the fan like it had to.Originally Posted by Goldenboy