I do know Mitt actually made all verterans in Massachusetts veterans. Before Mitt came around you were only a military veteran from 1975 and back.
Mitt Romney Claims Troops Weren’t Important Enough to Include in His Convention Speec
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Let's also not forget that was right around the time the US Health System went into the crapper, which he was against since the 60's, fear mongering over how Universal Health care systems were the starting point of taking away citizen's freedoms and way of life via socialism.... even though the military, police, fire departments and infrastructure is all a form of socialism.
Things were prosperous under Clinton but saying they weren't under Reagan is kind of silly.
1; the rich got richer and everyone stayed pretty much the same (income growth was comparable when Reagan got in. but while income growth for the majority went up a few percentage points, the income growth for the rich went up almost 200% by the time Reagan got out of the Oval Office), #2; job growth under Reagan averaged 2.1% per year while under Nixon/Ford, it was 1.76, under Carter, it was 2.3%, under GHW Bush is was 0.69%, and under Clinton it was 2.2%, so Reagan didn't do too bad, #3; unemployment went way up for a few years (the early 80s were ugly for pretty much every country) and then back down, so Reagan didn't do too bad on average, #4; the poverty rate went up, #5; productivity rate sucked (about 1.5% as opposed to 2.6% before Reagan and 2.5% after Reagan).
At any rate Reaganomics would not be the best thing to apply at this point in time anyway.
In my experience was we struggled a little as a familiy prior to Reagan. When Reagan took office things got a lot better and we were a lower middle class family prior to that time. I was SHOCKED when we actually got cable TV.
There are always exceptions. But anyway, Reaganomics had little sustained benefit (except for the rich).
I might mention that any discussion of bringing back the gold standard was squashed by Reagan's Gold Commission, so what we still have is a credit standard; basically a hotair balloon inside a house of cards.
I can only speak from personal experience. My dad was an electrician and it was tough in the 70's. When Reagan came there was a nice boom and there was only one sputter during the latter half of Bush Sr.'s Presidency which is how we got Clinton. But today's economy is a disaster that our current President is overseeing.
That's your excuse? That you have s h i t for brains? I'm amazed that you admit it, but I can't disagree with you.
A lot of right wingers love to say that under Obama has been the worse economy they have ever seen. But the facts as opposed to right wing myths simply do not support this lie:
By the Numbers: The Economy Under Reagan vs. Obama
"Under President Obama’s tenure, to date, we have seen an impressive recovery in the equity markets
"Barack Obama surpasses his 13 predecessors, including Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, relative to the stewardship of our financial markets and most economic indicators.
"Reagan presided over one of the longest recessions (16 months) in our history. In contrast, the recession under Obama lasted five months ..."
... more ...
Reagan's recovery was only after he presided over a prolonged recessionary period. The term "Reaganville" was created because of his ineptitude.
A lot of left wingers like to say everything is beautiful today and there is nothing to worry about.
Dude... look around. It is a disaster. Recovery Summer... Recovery Summer II, Recovery Summer III. Unemployment is still high and the job the latest job numbers aren't rosy either. They're predicting yet another recession for 2013.
.... and you don't need us to start throwing out names of describing Obama's ineptitude.
As I have posted before, I use this forum for entertainment. I've had many a laugh at the shallowness of thought exhibited by many of the posters.
Is it Obama's ineptitude or Republican's ineptitude in passing a jobs creation bill? When Bush pushed for his stimulus packages Democrats eagerly helped him get his way. When Obama pushes for help in fixing the economy he gets nothing.
So who really is to blame??
Yes the GOP wants some say in what is in the bill. That is what happens when you get elected. The Dems didn't want to negotiate or change the bill.
The Democrats are.
No argument there, except the 70s were great here. The 80s were a pain in the ass for quite a few people trying to find jobs, though.
Yep. I agree that recovery could have been better, but in truth, DOHbama only inherited the mess. There are a few faulting factors involved but the root of the problem was corporate greed and gov't catering to it.
Gaping in the mirror again, huh?