What Is So Good About Reagan?

[Ruprecht]

The post is dumb because it implies the government has anything to do with monetary policy.

And Federal banks certainly don't tighten it to deliberately increase unemployment so again his post is stupid. Sure that may be a consequence, but realistically they are tightening it to try and get control of inflation.

America's Federal Reserve doesn't operate quite the same as the Reserve Bank of Australia.

 

[Cold Front]

The post is dumb because it implies the government has anything to do with monetary policy.

And I just told you how.

Are you in third grade? Do you really think the Fed operates independently of political pressure? If you're really that dumb, then explain why the Fed just didn't raise interest rates in the sixties and seventies and end the problem of stagflation once and for all. Why did the problem drag on for over a decade?

And Federal banks certainly don't tighten it to deliberately increase unemployment so again his post is stupid. Sure that may be a consequence, but realistically they are tightening it to try and get control of inflation.

Rising wages were a major part of inflation during the seventies. So, yes, the Fed did in fact know that there would be a major rise in unemployment by raising interests rates. That was the intent - to squeeze inflation out of the system.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

America's Federal Reserve doesn't operate quite the same as the Reserve Bank of Australia.

It is still a private entity which is independent of government.

Since 1978 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has conducted regular audits of the banks' operations. The GAO audits are reported to the public, but they may not review a bank's monetary policy decisions or disclose them to the public

 

[Cold Front]

Not really, no. The country was in much, much better shape in the 1990s than it was in the 1980s. And the 1970s were a little better than the 1980s.

The economy in the seventies might not have been quite as bad as later advertised - although the decade was still bad compared to the bliss in the fifties and sixties - but the nation was not in "much, much better shape" in the 1970s than in the 1980s.

Vietnam, Watergate, Inflation, energy shocks, impeachment, Iran, rising crimes rates - the 1970s were awful.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

And I just told you how.

Are you in third grade? Do you really think the Fed operates independently of political pressure? If you're really that dumb, then explain why the Fed just didn't raise interest rates in the sixties and seventies and end the problem of stagflation once and for all. Why did the problem drag on for over a decade?



Rising wages were a major part of inflation during the seventies. So, yes, the Fed did in fact know that there would be a major rise in unemployment by raising interests rates. That was the intent - to squeeze inflation out of the system.

And you were wrong.

The government does not control monetary policy, if you can provide a legitimate source saying otherwise then I'm willing to concede. And political pressure does not equal control.

When you implement monetary policy do you expect that it will just work the next day? You do know that interest rates are tightened incrementally right? They don't just pick a rate and say this is it. They drop the current rate incrementally until the desired effect occurs so shock and horror it may take time to have it's desired effect. e.g. years

Rising wages were a part of inflation? You are just full of knowledge aren't you? When would rising wages not be a part of inflation?

 

[Cold Front]

It is still a private entity which is independent of government.

Yeah, you keep believing that, Kevin.

Now can you defend this grade school understanding of our institutions against an informed interlocutor?

Every Fed chairman knows that the Federal Reserve ultimately serves at the pleasure of the Congress. And so they've all been very careful to preserve the independence of the Fed by not acting in a moderate manner they can't defend before Congress.

Unlike the Supreme Court, the Fed's jurisdiction was created by Congress, and it can be revoked by an act of Congress. Its mandates were also created by Congress. Presidents, Congressmen, and bureaucrats routinely lobby the Fed - and are in turn lobbied by it. Its independence is precarious. It's not like the Supreme Court or even a private corporation.

Since 1978 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has conducted regular audits of the banks' operations. The GAO audits are reported to the public, but they may not review a bank's monetary policy decisions or disclose them to the public

You sound like Ron Paul.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Not really, no. The country was in much, much better shape in the 1990s than it was in the 1980s. And the 1970s were a little better than the 1980s.

I meant to type Carter; not Clinton.

As for the 70's - I recall high inflation, high unemployment, high interest rates, and gas lines. There's a reason why the chart is called a misery index.

If the economy hadn't turned when it did then Reagan wouldn't have been reelected; especially in the landslide that he did (49 states). Mondale barely won his own state and Reagan carried almost 60% of the popular vote.

 

[Cold Front]

And you were wrong.

The government does not control monetary policy, if you can provide a legitimate source saying otherwise then I'm willing to concede. And political pressure does not equal control.

I just provided you with two sources earlier in the thread. Both LBJ and Richard Nixon lobbied their Federal Reserve Chairman to keep interest rates low so the economy would continue growing. And inflation increased a great deal during their tenures.

In LBJ's case, a legitimate source from within the Federal Reserve says that President Johnson literally assaulted his Fed Chairman, William McChesney Martin, at Johnson's Texas ranch to persuade him to keep rates low.

When you implement monetary policy do you expect that it will just work the next day? You do know that interest rates are tightened incrementally right?

Who cares? It's not like presidents decide they want lower interest rates for the very next day and then call the Fed Chairman to get what they want.

No, they lobby hard for months in advance to soften opposition. In Nixon's case, he wanted an economy running at full steam when he ran for re-election in 1972. So he persuaded Arthur Burns to keep rates low even as inflation was increasing. Nixon then used price and wage controls to keep inflation momentarily in check until he could get the full political benefits of low interest rates without the full costs being evident to the voters.

Nixon knew when his re-election was coming and could plan ahead for it. In fact, he blamed the Fed under Eisenhower for losing him the 1960 election - a mistake he apparently decided not to let happen again.

They don't just pick a rate and say this is it. They drop the current rate incrementally until the desired effect occurs so shock and horror it may take time to have it's desired effect. e.g. years

Well, not years, but certainly months.

But again thanks for stating the obvious like it's a revelation.

Rising wages were a part of inflation? You are just full of knowledge aren't you? When would rising wages not be a part of inflation?

Commodity shocks. But then you knew that.

 

[Cold Front]

I meant to type Carter; not Clinton.

As for the 70's - I recall high inflation, high unemployment, high interest rates, and gas lines. There's a reason why the chart is called a misery index.

The only thing the seventies were good for was movies.

 

[Cold Front]

The Fed has the illusion of independence, but no Fed Chairman has ever acted like it's fully independent because they are well aware - even if Kevin Rudd is not - that what the Congress created, it can easily take away if the Fed makes unpopular decisions that are hard on the American people.

That's why there was a lot more political skill in Reagan's off-hands approach in the early 80s than many now appreciate.

http://books.google.com/books?id=7r...nepage&q=Volcker's thoughts on Reagan&f=false

 

[second sight]

from a better poster than you

If you want to attack Reagan, only bringing up his time in the Presidential office is hilarious.

Reagan was head of the actors guild. Well, I guess I should back-up, for those of you who dont know, Reagan was a A-list hollywood actor. And a democrat. He eventually became head of the actors guild (union). Now, what most dont know, at this time in history there were communists who had infiltrated hollywood and were planning on using it as a source of propanda. Reagan waged a one man war, as head of the actors guild and squashed the communist takeover. HICCASP (hollywood independent committe of the arts, sciences, and professions) executive board was compeletely taken over by communists. Thats how close they came. This is what started Reagan in politics. After he beat back the attempted communist takeover, he started giving speeches to the guild and eventually was paid by ge which we all know about.

Then he became govenor of a state that was bankrupt (like his presidency), California.

Reagan made huge steps in cleaning up welfare abuse as governor of Cali. Under his direction, monthly welfare caseloads went from increasing 40,000/month to DECREASING by 8,000/month....saving millions.

Reagan used his line-item-veto authority 943 times as governor, saving millions.

Reagan promised to give the people their money back once he raised taxes as governor and cut spending(not increase spending when times are bleak).

Ever heard of a Reagan raider? Of course not, your a zeolot. This team of BUSINESS (not Obama appointed professors) people identified where California's state government could be run more efficiently, saving the state hundred of millions of dollars. And not only talk about it, Reagan implemented these ideas.

Reagan ran surpluses as Governor. Instead of spending this money, he went on television BEFORE democrats new about the surplus and told the citizens of Cali about it....and explained how he wanted to give them a tax rebate as promised. That forced the democrats to go along with him in giving the people THEIR money back.

Similar to OWS, students at UC Berkley decided they would riot. Reagan called in the National guard and squashed the unrest.

Then the man took this stellar conservative performance to the white house.

Reagan inherited a 21% interest rate, double digit inflation, and rediciculous unemployment.

Reagan went to battle again against communists. This time it was in the form of a arms race with the soviets. He KNEW the only way to negotiate with communists was from a position of strength. Since Carter has slashed the defense budget, our standing in the world was loosing importance linear to how fast the communists caught up militarily. Reagan INCREASED military spending....which is benefiting us today, we gained the stealth bomber and he was right....after we were far superior to the soviets they agreed to start negotiating which again.....benefits us still to today as we lower our nuclear weapons cache. ***2nd time - Reagan did this by INCREASING military spending.

When Qaddafi claimed the gulf was his (international water) Reagan did not negotiate with this terrorist. He moved our navy, into this international waterway, and instructed our military to defend itself if fired upon by Qaddafi's airforce. When asked by our commanders how far we should follow Qaddafi's fighter jets if we werer fired upon Reagan responded "All the way into the hanger". And he did just that. Two of Qaddafi's fighter jets fired upon an American Warship and our jets went airborn and destroyed both. This sent a clear message to the entire world. Terrorism will not be tolerated.

Understand the position from which Reagan was negotiating. Carter had just increased spending by 17% (thats what liberals believe in doing when we dont have money, spend more of what we dont have). Reagan was able to convince enough democrats to lower this 17% down to 9%. It was the largest deficit reduction in history at that time and was considered radical.

He also lowered the federal income tax rate because he believe this would generate more income, which it did.

Reagan put forward his budget containing a balanced budget amendment the democratic house rejected this and funded government with continuing resolutions. This gave Reagan 2 options. 1 accept the continuing resolutions or 2 shut down government.

Reagans was at a gunfight without his trusty pistol which he was quick with a govenor: line item veto.

There was no real option. He did what any patriot would do. He negotiated for the best deal he could get, and took it.

Of course there were many other great things Reagan did as president. The grace commission, deregulate oil companies, lowered farm subsidies, etc.



Until presidents have a line-item veto and there is a constituional amendment mandating a balanced budget, I think the country is likely to face never-ending deficits piled up by a profligate congress unable or unwilling to make the hard-nosed decisions necessary to bring down spending to a level the country can afford. - Ronald Reagan



Ronald Reagan was the greatest president, and one of the best people, of my lifetime BY LEAP YEARS.

 

[MASShole]

An SPF50 reference.

Dis gun be good.

It's always fun when "new" posters out themselves as repeats.

 

[IGIT]

hi all,

President Reagan is especially fond of broiled swordfish napped with lemon butter. Mrs. Reagan is fond of number of fish dishes, including salmon mousse, grilled halibut steak, broiled trout with kiwi fruit, and swordfish Veronique.

The President usually supplements his morning repast with whole wheat toast or a home-made muffin...Monkey Bread is a heavy, sweet loaf that serves as a Reagain family tradition...Reserved for special occasions and holidays, Monkey Bread is a definate deviation from the lighter fare preferred by the First Lady

http://www.foodtimeline.org/presidents.html#reagan

monkey bread. i never heard of such a food.

- IGIT

 

[Jack V Savage]

An SPF50 reference.

Dis gun be good.

It's always fun when "new" posters out themselves as repeats.

I don't think he's SPF. Different styles. Obviously, he's someone who was around back then, though. Maybe Texas1Willy2. I think Calmete is SPF. Either way, that post was embarrassing to read.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Reagan was one of the dirtiest, corrupt, and one of the worst presidents of all time...

What he put in motion is being realized today, he was a shill for corporate America and set in motion the biggest redistribution of wealth from middle class to the rich we have ever seen..


Reagan is all MYTH, even Santa Claus and Bigfoot have less myths about them than 'ol senile Ronny.

 

[SleepyBoy]

hi all,

http://www.foodtimeline.org/presidents.html#reagan

monkey bread. i never heard of such a food.

- IGIT

monkey bread is essentially like a giant loaf of pancake bread with syrup on it.

 

[394Ever]

Reagan was one of the dirtiest, corrupt, and one of the worst presidents of all time...

What he put in motion is being realized today, he was a shill for corporate America and set in motion the biggest redistribution of wealth from middle class to the rich we have ever seen..


Reagan is all MYTH, even Santa Claus and Bigfoot have less myths about them than 'ol senile Ronny.

The same applies to the current president, minus the senile part.

 

[lfd0311]

lol if you really believe that nonsense.

Please, tell me more...

 

[lfd0311]

Really? Our nuclear weapons had nothing to do with it? Or our massive standing army?.

Is our standing army a "technology" on it's own? Nope, it sure isn't.

And let's not blow Reagan's military record out of proportion. He spent WW2 making propaganda films and never left the US. Hardly the stuff of hardass legend.

I never said he did, I said he and the guys around him came out of that line of thinking.

Also, the WW2 generation stayed the hell out of WW2 until the US was attacked. Don't make it sound like we were crusaders for peace and liberty

Did you have some trouble comprehending what I said? I never said we where crusading heros. On top of that "the WWII generation" in America was about 14 when WWII started.

We defended ourselves, which is noble in and of itself but hardly something for other nations to fear so long as they didn't attack us. Most of the senior leadership (Eisenhower being the best example) were extremely skeptical of war and having the country on a perpetual war footing. This is just more right wing mythologizing distoring actual history.

What are you even talking about? Eisenhower is not of the "WWII Generation". Eisenhower would have been at least in his mid 50s during WWII. I'm talking about the guys in the 80's who would have young men during WWII, that grew up to be the policy makers of the 70's and 80's. Don't see what was so confusing about that, or what I'm "mythologizing

 

[lfd0311]

I think Obama and Clinton are popular because they have objectively had a lot of major successes. Reagan was kind of just there. But, like I said, all Republican presidents since Eisenhower have been embarrassments in one way or another, other than Reagan.

What success has Obama had? If I were Bill Clinton and people constantly compared Obama to me I'd be furious. Clinton is the hands down the best President of the last 70 years. Obama is hands down one of the worst of all time, if not the worst.