• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

10 years after Reagan’s death: How does Obama's record compare to Reagan's?

code1211 said:
The first two years of the Reagan Administration were sluggish, but the hope was returning even then.

The last 6 years of the Reagan administration were marked by robust growth and a return to the preeminent standing in the world that the USA enjoyed until the ill advised military excursions led by W.
Click to expand...

See post #14. The Reagan miracle wasn't as miraculous as you remember. Since you bring in foreign affairs, Reagan also was the Administration that sold chemical weapons to Iraq, that were used on the Kurds. He also gave military arms to the people who later would be al Qaeda.

Rumsfeld 'offered help to Saddam' | World news | The Guardian
A 1994 congressional inquiry also found that dozens of biological agents, including various strains of anthrax, had been shipped to Iraq by US companies, under licence from the commerce department.
Furthermore, in 1988, the Dow Chemical company sold $1.5m-worth (£930,000) of pesticides to Iraq despite suspicions they would be used for chemical warfare.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
code1211 said:
The Auto Industry was killed more by the Auto Industry than by anything else.

The Bloated incomes and low productivity of the American Firms is being amended to a closer match with the foreign competition.

The Salaried folks in the American Firms are still getting comparatively bloated paychecks.
Click to expand...


Really? Prove it? Liberals have to love taxing the rich to redistribute wealth and lower productivity so we can be like Europe with high unemployment, high govt. dependence, low economic growth, and massive debt

Want to see bloated salaries, look at Union management and what exactly do they produce?
 
Lord of Planar said:
So how much more do we need to relax interest rates for Obama?
Click to expand...

I guess you weren't paying attention. While the 1980s recession was caused by the Fed increasing interest rates to ward off inflation, that wasn't the case in 2008. The cause of that recession was following the bursting of a housing bubble that diminished liquidity that then caused drying up of consumer demand. That wasn't going to be quickly undone by lowering interest rates which weren't raised in the first place.
 
MTAtech said:
I guess you weren't paying attention. While the 1980s recession was caused by the Fed increasing interest rates to ward off inflation, that wasn't the case in 2008. The cause of that recession was following the bursting of a housing bubble that diminished liquidity that then caused drying up of consumer demand. That wasn't going to be quickly undone by lowering interest rates which weren't raised in the first place.
Click to expand...

And obviously you weren't around or old enough during the Carter years to see what he did that caused those inflationary pressures, high interest rates, foreign policy failures as well as general economic malaise. I suggest that you stop reading the liberal rags and buying the liberal rhetoric to get the actual mood of the country was well as the economic conditions that Reagan inherited.
 
MTAtech said:
See post #14. The Reagan miracle wasn't as miraculous as you remember. Since you bring in foreign affairs, Reagan also was the Administration that sold chemical weapons to Iraq, that were used on the Kurds. He also gave military arms to the people who later would be al Qaeda.
Click to expand...



Reagan carried 49 states and missed having carried all 50 states by .18% of the vote in Minnesota, his opponent's home state.

It is my memory and the contemporary action and understanding of the American population that support the truth you are trying to undermine.
 
Conservative said:
10 years after Reagan



Buoyed by BLS.gov, BEA.gov, Treasury, HUD Data the numbers are in and for you Reagan and Conservative haters the picture isn't a pretty one. Obama is a disaster especially for the people he claimed he wanted to help and yet still has the low information voter support. The facts are in the numbers so how about it liberals refute the official data?
Click to expand...


But wait... as a conservative you should agree that the government doesn't create jobs... right? So why would the unemployment have anything to do with Obama or Reagan?
 
Conservative said:
Really? Prove it? Liberals have to love taxing the rich to redistribute wealth and lower productivity so we can be like Europe with high unemployment, high govt. dependence, low economic growth, and massive debt

Want to see bloated salaries, look at Union management and what exactly do they produce?
Click to expand...



Yes, really.

One of the defining features of the American Union is that it worked against the goals of "Management". Conversely, Management worked to achieve goals that are not related to the welfare of the Union membership.

That this relationship existed in the state that it did is testimony to the fact that the American Auto Industry allowed this relationship to grow in the way that it did into what it became.

It takes two to tango. When the relationship is based on distrust and mutual deceit, this is the only outcome possible.

My career has taken me through various occupations including being a union member, a management member and association with companies that are union shops, but with which I had no labor force considerations or interest.

In every stage, it is obvious that the Union member delights in confounding the Boss by woking as slowly as possible and doing the minimum required by the letter of the contract.

That said, the American Auto Product was suffering in terms of value and quality and this was revealed by the onset of the "Imports" in the 70's.

The planning, execution and the outcomes of both were exposed by the shift of the buying practices to cars with better quality and value bearing a foreign nameplate.
 
code1211 said:
Yes, really.

One of the defining features of the American Union is that it worked against the goals of "Management". Conversely, Management worked to achieve goals that are not related to the welfare of the Union membership.

That this relationship existed in the state that it did is testimony to the fact that the American Auto Industry allowed this relationship to grow in the way that it did into what it became.

It takes two to tango. When the relationship is based on distrust and mutual deceit, this is the only outcome possible.

My career has taken me through various occupations including being a union member, a management member and association with companies that are union shops, but with which I had no labor force considerations or interest.

In every stage, it is obvious that the Union member delights in confounding the Boss by woking as slowly as possible and doing the minimum required by the letter of the contract.

That said, the American Auto Product was suffering in terms of value and quality and this was revealed by the onset of the "Imports" in the 70's.

The planning, execution and the outcomes of both were exposed by the shift of the buying practices to cars with better quality and value bearing a foreign nameplate.
Click to expand...

Wow.. I'm not sure what union outfit you were working with but maybe they were all just lazy assholes. I know as an Ironworker I don't have the luxury of being lazy and doing the least amount possible.
 
OnWisconsin said:
Wow.. I'm not sure what union outfit you were working with but maybe they were all just lazy assholes. I know as an Ironworker I don't have the luxury of being lazy and doing the least amount possible.
Click to expand...



Are iron workers a labor union or a trade union?
 
Its a trade union. 4 year apprenticeship with schooling.
 
OnWisconsin said:
But wait... as a conservative you should agree that the government doesn't create jobs... right? So why would the unemployment have anything to do with Obama or Reagan?
Click to expand...

Because the govt. creates the atmosphere to create jobs and Reagan believed in the private sector, created the incentive for individual wealth creation, and economic growth. Seems you have a problem with that concept
 
Conservative said:
Because the govt. creates the atmosphere to create jobs and Reagan believed in the private sector, created the incentive for individual wealth creation, and economic growth. Seems you have a problem with that concept
Click to expand...

Except Reagan didn't create an atmosphere that created jobs- he wrote a series of I.O.U.s to fund a military build-up, and road a cyclic recovery for a few years. His atmosphere created E-wealth that sat on fund ledgers to be leveraged out to create still more E-wealth that didn't churn back through the economy.

Comparing the unemployment rate, inflation and federal spending as a % of the GDP Reagan's years are not very sterling and no amount of 'atmosphere' can disguise we went from the largest Creditor nation to the largest Debtor nation.
 
LOL...

You know that Reagan was a great president when liberals and progressives still trash him so many years later!
 
OnWisconsin said:
Its a trade union. 4 year apprenticeship with schooling.
Click to expand...



The unions I was in were labor unions. The Union Shops in which I managed were labor unions. The union shops in which i observed the work of the workers and their attitudes were labor unions.

My brother in law is a Boiler Maker, a Trade Union, and the two types of unions are very different.

I was personally told to be less productive by the Union Steward once because I was hurting the Union.

As I understand Trade Unions, these are much more like a supplier of expert and qualified labor to fulfill difficult and needed labor functions in a high quality and efficient method utilizing the highest standard and in fact creating and enforcing those standards.

In this way, the Trade Union is actually a supplier of a product on the open market and the employer is a buyer of that product. Very Capitalist.

The Labor Union provides bodies that are trained by the Employer to standards created and enforced by the employer. The lowest amount of work any individual is required to complete in any day allows a greater number of union members to be employed. The more productive individuals become in this system, the fewer Union Members are needed. The union fights hammer and tong to prevent the depletion of its membership's numbers regardless of the profitability of the results.

The Trade Union members complete the contracted tasks and vacates.
 
notquiteright said:
Except Reagan didn't create an atmosphere that created jobs- he wrote a series of I.O.U.s to fund a military build-up, and road a cyclic recovery for a few years. His atmosphere created E-wealth that sat on fund ledgers to be leveraged out to create still more E-wealth that didn't churn back through the economy.

Comparing the unemployment rate, inflation and federal spending as a % of the GDP Reagan's years are not very sterling and no amount of 'atmosphere' can disguise we went from the largest Creditor nation to the largest Debtor nation.
Click to expand...




House hold income increased by about $6000/year during Reagan's tenure as President.

How do you define that as being a bad thing for Americans?
 
code1211 said:
House hold income increased by about $6000/year during Reagan's tenure as President.

How do you define that as being a bad thing for Americans?
Click to expand...

Is that 6000/year a result of the average wage going up or is it actual 6000/household? The reason I ask is because during Reagans tenure was the start of the glaring income inequality we see right now. The rich got super rich and everyone else just stayed the same. Which if it was average wage increase then the super rich would be influencing that number quite heavily.
 
code1211 said:
House hold income increased by about $6000/year during Reagan's tenure as President. How do you define that as being a bad thing for Americans?
Click to expand...

And it never increased while any other President was in office????

The income increase is an average, false to claim every American saw an increase, much less that amount. how was that increase spread across the population? This is a classic case of a rising tide didn't float all boats.

Now throw-in the sad fact the debt for future generations was heavily increased for a short term gain for some, a push for others (taxes went up on Middle Class America while going down for the upper and corporate America) and the Reagan years set a standard that later Neo-CONs would embrace- deficient doesn't matter... :shock:
 
APACHERAT said:
Government spending under Reagan increased because Reagan had to rebuild our military that the Democrats allowed to fall in disrepair during the 1970's.

As you may remember, the Groucho Marxist (New Left aka radical leftist) had joined the Democrat Party and in 1975 they decided to surrender and refused to continue fighting the Cold War.
Click to expand...

We were winding down from Vietnam in the 70's...How old are you?
 
Sababa said:
I all can say is the under Reagan unemployment got higher than it did under Obama.
Click to expand...

really? what was the average unemployment rate under Reagan vs Obama

The job growth under the Reagan administration was an average of 2.1% per year, with unemployment averaging 7.5%. The unemployment averaged 6.4 percent under President Carter and 7.8 percent under President Ford.[35] Towards the end of his second term however the unemployment rate dropped to 5.4%.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
 
TurtleDude said:
really? what was the average unemployment rate under Reagan vs Obama

The job growth under the Reagan administration was an average of 2.1% per year, with unemployment averaging 7.5%. The unemployment averaged 6.4 percent under President Carter and 7.8 percent under President Ford.[35] Towards the end of his second term however the unemployment rate dropped to 5.4%.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Click to expand...

i don't remember saying anything about average I said the Reagan allowed the unemployment to climb to a higher point than it ever did under President Obama.
 
Conservative said:
Because the govt. creates the atmosphere to create jobs and Reagan believed in the private sector, created the incentive for individual wealth creation, and economic growth. Seems you have a problem with that concept
Click to expand...
When Reagan was president the U.S.A. produced finished goods for the world, we had a positive balance of trade which means we exported more goods than we imported. It also meant there were many manufacturing jobs available. With globalization most of those jobs have been exported to other countries. Today when a new product is developed it is manufactured in another country.
 
Sababa said:
i don't remember saying anything about average I said the Reagan allowed the unemployment to climb to a higher point than it ever did under President Obama.
Click to expand...

really? what did it CLIMB to under Reagan
 
I think it's funny that these unemployment number increases only start when both houses of congress are democrats.
 
1750Texan said:
We were winding down from Vietnam in the 70's...How old are you?
Click to expand...

But the "New Left" who had hijacked the Democrat Party continued their war against the U.S. military and those who served and were still serving.

Did you forget or aren't old enough to remember ?

Hollow Military.

The Vietnam War was just one battle fought during the Cold War. There were those who wanted to surrender after Vietnam and not continue the fight to stop communist expansion in the world. Reagan came around and wouldn't let it happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom