Lets make fun of Obama while he is still relevant.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-05-2016, 02:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: While there is no mention of the laffer curve in your paragraphs, neither is there mention of supply side economics, so it can't be taken as indicative of what supply side economics is.  But it's unsurprising that a left wing university would choose an unrepresentative document for Reagan's economic plan.

The paper in question popped up as the first item in my first google search.  It served the purpose well enough that I didn't look further.  I didn't consider how partisans will reject information based purely on its source.  I'll still say the Reagan White House is a better source on the policies of the Reagan White House than you.

The gist of Republican financial policy through the unravelling is still stated well in the first three paragraphs.  Cut the budget.  Alter tax codes to give the investing class the funds to produce jobs.  Cut regulations.  These will stand as the basic bread and butter of how Reagan, Bush, Bush and their heirs are perceived, in great part because that is the core of the promises they made.  This is what the politicians are feeding the public.

I won't deny that academics and economists might well have a deeper understanding, and that you are trying to bring this understanding to the boards.  Go for it.  Great.  I just wouldn't put on a Reagan hand puppet while you are doing so.  The Republican politicians seldom go into that depth.  Simple easy answers win more votes than well thought out academic presentations.  I wouldn't assume the typical reader of the board has dug into the academics either.  Altering your presentation somewhat to reflect this might be prudent.  You are coming across as reality challenged, even if the impression is misleading in this case.

While the first three paragraphs are well remembered, the fourth is not.  Eliminate the deficit?  Limit the money supply?  All four pillars were originally presented as a coherent whole, even if the fourth has long since suffered critical impact damage from an encounter with political realities.  Bush 41 lost his second term on "It's the economy, stupid."  Bush 43 collapsed the economy.  However sound the Reagan approach might have seemed in theory, the theory couldn't be implemented.  Playing the blame game for why it couldn't be implemented doesn't change the fact that attempts to make it work failed the country badly.  I am not seeing any indication to suggest the upcoming Congress will be any more cooperative, that another attempt will turn out differently.  What was it that Einstein said about trying the same thing and expecting a different result?

Yes, Democrats in Congress made it impossible for Reagan and the Bushes to do what they wanted to do.  Republicans in Congress made it impossible for Obama to do what he wanted to do.  Huston, we have a problem.  The difference is in Republicans producing collapses while Democrats produce anemic unsatisfactory recoveries from said collapses.  I'm wistfully wishing that somehow we might manage to do better.  No, my plan doesn't include holding my breath until it happens.