Do you know this guy?

[seccsi]

The environment was quite different then, I lived through it :-) inflation was 13% then, unemployment was 7%, there had been no huge housing crash, and the national debt was less than half the gdp. Quite different

Inflation hasn't dropped since then though, and we were in a recession. How many times have you heard these right wing people say "you don't raise taxes in a recession?" The conservative king certainly did! Again it's the hypocrisy that I don't like.

[EasyEJL]

Inflation hasn't dropped since then ? It hasn't been over half that since Reagan's second term.

Conveniently you forget in saying that Reagan raised taxes that it was after passing some of the largest tax cuts in history, and the amount he later raised them did not wipe out the cuts. The top tier income tax rate went from 70% to 28% which is an enormous difference. So some tax hikes were necessary after that to get income right ? Big whoop, it was still lower than when he took office.

[seccsi]

Inflation hasn't dropped since then ? It hasn't been over half that since Reagan's second term.

Conveniently you forget in saying that Reagan raised taxes that it was after passing some of the largest tax cuts in history, and the amount he later raised them did not wipe out the cuts. The top tier income tax rate went from 70% to 28% which is an enormous difference. So some tax hikes were necessary after that to get income right ? Big whoop, it was still lower than when he took office.

You're quick to defend the conservative champ and missing the larger picture of what I'm saying. I wasn't trying to get in a "Is Ronald Reagan" great type debate (though I certainly think he's about as overrated as any President ever).

When Reagan came into office he cut taxes big time, in fact that's the reason he raised taxes. He cut taxes big time, couldn't cut spending and the debt exploded. He proceeded to raise taxes then. He realized a revenue increase was necessary because we won't cut gov't spending to a level that does anything.

It doesn't change the fact that he raised taxes many times anymore than it changes the fact he raised the debt ceiling many times and exploded the size of the federal gov't. In fairness, so has everyone since him. It's just ironic to me that all these conservatives hail him in one breath and then say we can't raise taxes ever or raise the debt ceiling. It's a little disingenuous at best. Republicans love to ignore the inconvenient truths of his administration is all I'm saying, and the hypocrisy of the right is pretty undeniable.

[EasyEJL]

I still fail to see the hypocrisy when the financial situation is wildly different. Interest rates on a mortgage are 4% today, they were as high as 18% then. Our government right now is in the following scenario

"If the US Government was a family, they would be making $58,000 a year, they spend $75,000 a year, & are $327,000 in credit card debt. They are currently proposing BIG spending cuts to reduce their spending to $72,000 a year. These are the actual proportions of the federal budget & debt, reduced to a level that we can understand." -Dave Ramsey

That's not where we were in 1980

[jamesm11]

The environment is very different.

We have been in 2 conflicts since 2001/2003 that have created a military budget that is huge.

There are a lot more countries out there that are powerful and its not just Russia that we are worried about.

Our world reach is different.

The recession wasn't close to what we have experienced recently.

The list goes on...

The world climate also affects our politics, not just the internal workings.

I can't comment on our commander in chief because I serve ultimately under that position, and respect it.

[EasyEJL]

As another perspective piece, the highest deficit for Reagan was just over 200 billion, with tax revenue of 700 billion, with forecasts of gdp growth . In contrast, the obama deficit is over 1.5 trillion on 2.5 in revenue. A deficit of less than 30% of revenue vs a deficit of more than 60%. Its not from lower tax revenue its from continued (since FDR) often unconstitutional increase in size of government

[mich29]

great discussion here fellas.

[seccsi]

All you guys are really doing is skirting the question. Yes the debt is much higher now than it was in 1980. Why is it much higher? Partially because Reagan, Bush, and Bush 2 exploded the debt! (Don't get me started on the Clinton fake surpluses) Saying the situation is different and pointing out things like the debt is much higher isn't helping much. It's still PURE hypocrisy to say we can't raise the debt ceiling in one breath and praise the man who raised it 11 times in another breath. It's PURE hypocrisy to say you can't raise taxes in a recession in one breath and praise the man who did JUST that in another breath. Hell of course the debt is much higher now...we had three Republican presidents who shot the damn debt up

My point all along has been that Reagan did things that people on the right are saying Obama CAN'T do AND exploded the size of the federal government. Both of these points are undoubtedly true. If you want to make the argument that politicians are hypocritical by nature go for it. I won't argue. If you don't focus on the fact that Reagan repeatedly did things that the right says Obama shouldn't do all while praising Reagan then you're not really addressing what I'm talking about.

Granted I haven't liked any President lately because they have all exploded the size of the government and stripped us of our civil liberties. It just blows my mind sometimes the hypocrisy of the Republican party. They repeatedly say one thing and do another.

[EasyEJL]

You are nuts on that. Saying I can't raise the debt that is now more than 6 times my annual income is completely different from an economic perspective than raising your debt when it's 2 years income. There's no hypocrisy, from an accounting or economic perspective its far different.

[EasyEJL]

And "raising" taxes while still keeping them lower than when he took office is about as real as Congress's "cuts" against future planned increases.

[mich29]

solid back and forth here.I still say make a few things legal and tax them to help out the economy.if they drag down the work force due to making them legal then scrap the idea and make them illegal again.

[seccsi]

You are nuts on that. Saying I can't raise the debt that is now more than 6 times my annual income is completely different from an economic perspective than raising your debt when it's 2 years income. There's no hypocrisy, from an accounting or economic perspective its far different.

What made 6 times the magic mark? Again, Republicans had no problem raising it under Bush 2 when it was higher than 2 years income. Now magically that Obama is in office it's all the sudden too much? They didn't have a problem raising it while Bush was cutting taxes, fighting multiple wars, and sending the American people checks in the mail.

Republicans wouldn't have had any problem raising it the President had an R by his name either. Again this is just apologizing and moving the goalposts. American citizens were greatly arguing the size of our national debt in the early 1900's. So now magically it's too big? This all goes back to the 2 party system argument and the absurd notion that a Republican in office during these last three years would have acted any different. They would have kept the wars and they would have had a stimulus package and bailed out the auto companies.

Literally the same people who complain about the growing size of the federal government now are the same people who supported people who did the same thing. Partisan politics at its finest. It's a big deal when "that guy" does it, not a big deal when we do it.

[seccsi]

And "raising" taxes while still keeping them lower than when he took office is about as real as Congress's "cuts" against future planned increases.

? Rates are much lower now than they were when Reagan was in office.

Anyways, I told myself I was done arguing politics on here, it just gets me worked up

Have a good one people.

[EasyEJL]

No they aren't, the rates are higher noe

[EasyEJL]

The top tier then was 28%, today its 35%

[seccsi]

The top tier then was 28%, today its 35%

Depends on how you want to look at it. For 7 years of the Reagan presidency the tax rate was higher. During all of Reagan's presidency the tax burden was higher as well according to the tax foundation's way of calculating tax burden.

Taxes on the whole are lower today. Unless you cherrypick one year of Reagan's presidency out of 8.

Anyways, I'm outta this before I lose my mind. I just don't understand how the right can love Reagan and ignore some of the genuine facts about him. The size of the federal government and the deficit went way up during his tenure. Sure we can make all sorts of excuses for why and do the usual "it wasn't that bad then as it is now" and cherrypick all the stats we want, but it doesn't change the fact in the least bit that:

1. Reagan raised taxes many times during his tenure AND in a recession (something Republicans say you can't do in a recession AND many have signed a no tax increases pledge).

2. Reagan raised the debt ceiling many times during his tenure.

3. The national debt and overall size of government increased during his tenure.

These are undeniable facts. They can't be changed as they DID happen.

[EasyEJL]

On the deficit / debt issue, s&p has downgraded us debt, and the other bureaus have issued warnings due to the size of the deficit and debt, quite different than in Reagan's time. The debt isn't all Obama's fault, but it has gotten too high and needs to change

[seccsi]

On the deficit / debt issue, s&p has downgraded us debt, and the other bureaus have issued warnings due to the size of the deficit and debt, quite different than in Reagan's time. The debt isn't all Obama's fault, but it has gotten too high and needs to change

Perhaps, but let's not forget Reagan's own words:

Reagan warned that without a higher debt ceiling, the country could be forced to default for the first time in its history.

(1983) Reagan wrote: “The full consequences of a default – or even the serious prospect of default – by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and the value of the dollar.”

(1987) “Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinksmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the Federal deficit would soar.”

The American public and politicians have been arguing and fearful of the size of the national debt since its inception.

Out for real this time, good discussion fellas!

[EasyEJL]

Perhaps, but let's not forget Reagan's own words:

Reagan warned that without a higher debt ceiling, the country could be forced to default for the first time in its history.

(1983) Reagan wrote: "The full consequences of a default - or even the serious prospect of default - by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and the value of the dollar."

(1987) "Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinksmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the Federal deficit would soar."

The American public and politicians have been arguing and fearful of the size of the national debt since its inception.

Out for real this time, good discussion fellas!

That all is true, however again at that time the total load of the debt and interest was far lower as a percentage of government income, and those same dire consequences are happening anyway as our total debt load is too high today. In his time, raising the debt ceiling didn't still result in a credit downgrade as the current rise in debt ceiling did.

[EasyEJL]

In debt and deficit alone, the difference then vs now is then, a person earning $50,000 a year living on spending $62000 a year and having $109,000 in debt vs that same $50,000 a year income spending more than $75,000 a year, and having $350,000 in debt.

You can see as an individual perspective why its so different today. But definitely there should have been the sustained push to make the fake Clinton surplus into a real one, and bush sucked for passing Medicare part d, and plenty of his other spending. Still I find what he or Reagan chose to spend on more than what Obama has chose to spend on.