|
PiMac, perhaps you are a bit sleepy, since this post in not wholly coherent...Why don't you explain to me the man's philosophy?...Since economics is not your forte, I will not get into a big argument with you, but no, the changes were more than cosmetic...Stagflation had little to do with Vietnam, and a lot to do with bad policy. The Keynesian explanation of Reagan's success was ex post facto, since the liberals had been predicting doom, and had to come up with something to explain boom. It is not convincing, since, as I said, a drawdown had few deleterious effects...The global business climate didn't improve that much, since several of the Asian Tigers have been suffering severe recession for most of the decade, and the Europeans have long fretted over "Eurosclerosis". What improved was our productivity and competitiveness...We have given massive amounts of aid to Russia, largely through multi- lateral institutions that we largely fund. They have mostly wasted it...The idea that Reagan had anything to do with the situation in Kosovo is so strange, I am speechless... |
