It doesnt matter how old I am. I could be 70 or I could be 20
I am not an expert on Reagan, but I have a very good understanding of economics, something I have followed since the Reagan admin. In fact during the Reagan Admin I thought his economic policies were pretty good.
Then I got an understanding of finance and economic and how they both interact.
For instance take a look at the following charts (which you have seen before)
File:USDebt.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For this discussion the second one is important as it takes into account the growth in the economy.
Notice how federal government debt as % of GDP is generally flat or decreasing for the couple of decades preceding the Reagan years. That means the debt burden of the federal government did not increase all that much in relation to the economy. Overall during that time government spending was not all that stimulative to the economy. Now take a look at what happens at about 1982 on the chart. The debt as a % of GDP starts to expand from around 25% (poorly designed charts) to around 40%. This is an increase in the debt load of the federal government. Meaning the deficit as % of GDP was bigger then the GDP growth rate.
Overall the Reagan admin was following
Keynsian economics throughout its entire time in office. Government spending was being used to stimulate economic growth. That is a plan fact. Any government using borrowed money to stimulate the economy is not fiscally conservative, especially if it is doing it during good economic times ( last 5 years of the Reagan admin)
The GWB admin followed pretty much the same economic policies with an even worse eventual outcome for the country. The RE bubble dwarfed the S&L crisis.
Overall I got a far better understanding of economics, and did not let hero worship get in the way of a rational understanding what actually went on