45 Years ago yesterday.
A Time for Choosing.
YouTube - "A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan
A Time for Choosing.
YouTube - "A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan
A Time for Choosing
- Thread starter Calabrio
- Start date
Joeys Lincoln
Active LVC Member
It's a good thing Clinton had us in a surplus http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1110165.stm he only had to deal with the choices the men before him made. Including that actor's speech up there.
Clinton did what exactly?
Which policies, which economic principles, did Clinton subscribe to that lead to the perceived "surplus?"
Or did Clinton have the fortune of both being President during a bubble economy and the slightly increased fiscal responsibility that came after losing both the House and the Senate to the Republicans for the first time in a half century?
It's a brilliant speech written by a man who loved what this country stood for.
Are you attempting deride him by calling him an "actor?" Would it be more noble to have a lawyer up there?
But most importantly, what does your idiotic, knee-jerk comment have to do with any of the substance of the speech?
If you're going to contribute, do us all the favor of at least being somewhat thoughtful.
Joeys Lincoln
Active LVC Member
And who caused the collapse in the first place, letting the wealth trickle down worked wonderfully.
Settle down I was simply stating his profession at the time, he didn't become the governor of California until two years later
My comment had to do with in the beginning of the video where Reagan is discussing the apparent mass amount of national debt in 1965, something he wouldn't fix in his time of office either.
You're throwing around terms, yet I get the distinct impression you don't understand what they mean.
Who caused which collapse?
The internet bubble?
I presume you're talking about the more recent housing bubble?
And where does supply-side economics even factor into that?
Why don't you explain to me how supply side economics resulted in the housing bubble.
He tried, but the priorities of the era and the Democrat control of the Congress made it impossible to do. However, those "trickle down policies" did lead to economy of the 1990s, that you seem to like to reflect upon.
Note, Clinton took office right after a brief recessionary cycle and left office at the beginning of one. He displayed that Clinton good-fortune of just being in the right place at the right time there. Just as he did when ran for the President. No one though Bush could be beat, so he beat a weak group in the primary. And the Perot split the vote enough to squeak by with a minority win.
What "collapse"? How specifically did the trickle down thing "not work"? By what standards are you making that claim?
And he wasn't an actor at that point either. You might wanna actually know what you are talking about instead of making ignorant assumptions.
Does the President have the power to "fix" the national debt?
Joeys Lincoln
Active LVC Member
The late 80's early 90's recession, Reagan's recession http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/13/EDGD56N5BJ1.DTL yes he was able to turn around the recession Carter had caused in 81-82 but when he left office and Bush Sr. was elected we entered another admittedly brief recession. Because of Bush's new taxes that had to be implemented due to the longer term effects of Reagonomics.
Which as we know led to him going back on his no new taxes, that led to him losing to Clinton in his bid for reelection.
See above
That's valid.
By the way Reagan worked on Death Valley Days into 1965 as the host of the show, know your facts.
It is easy to attribute a recession to a president but can you show that the late 1980's recession was caused by Reagan's policies specifically, or are you simply assertion speculation as fact? Reagan's fiscal and monetary strategy greatly reduced inflation, increased tax revenue. There is also the fact that American's income grew during that time as well.
So, specifically, how was the late 1980's recession caused by Reagan's policies?
You might want to familiarize yourself with the politics around the tax increase. It was not "due to the longer term effects of Reaganomics"
Yeah, that doesn't disprove what Cal said.
The fact was that Reagan's policies did set the stage for the tech boom in the 1990's. Simply because there was a mild recession in the middle of that doesn't change that fact. When it comes to fiscal polices, especially in the area of taxes, the full effects are usually not known until well after that administration has been replaced.