Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (57119)	10/4/1999 11:44:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

How could they since the 1981-82 recession occurred prior to Reagan's policies taking effect and as Charles L. Schultze, Jimmy Carter's economic advisor admitted, was a product of Carter's policies, not Reagan's. Zoltan, tax cuts aside, you have got to admit that Reaganomics was in no way prepared for the totally closed foreign markets of the 80s... our markets were wide open (as Reagan's free trade policies dictated) but Japan Inc. wasn't playing along. Meanwhile whole industries were eliminated, it started with finished goods and moved up along the food chain towards machine tools etc. When individuals think of the 1982 recession, often they are referring to this displacement of industries, not the recession itself... and that was Reagan's doing. At the same time, the Asian Tigers were completely ignoring our intellectual property laws and pirating every piece of software they could get their hands on, with no repercussions from the USA...

To: Zoltan! who wrote (57119)	10/4/1999 11:57:00 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 108807

Thank you, Zolt, I was waiting to see if you had corrected her....

To: Zoltan! who wrote (57119)	10/5/1999 3:29:00 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

<<<You are an economic illiterate.>>> Yes, I am, you are right about that. And I had no reputation as an economist to lose. Because I am so very illiterate on the subject of economics, I made clear in the following ways that my post was not about economics, but about something else. Recognizing my economic illiteracy, I said 1) "The following is not about Reagan's economic policies." 2. "I am not quoting them to initiate an argument about his policies over the eight years of his presidency, but ONLY to illustrate something about the most peculiar relationship between the man and the beliefs that he had embraced and his staff." 3. "Here's the quote. You can skim the first para." (The one dealing with Reagan's economic policies.) However, I do know that there are many scholars whose position is different from yours on this matter. (You know that too, I assume.) A sample counter view, also from the one book I have at hand, is this: "By the time he ran for reelection in 1984, Reagan said that it was 'morning in America, because America is back..." What America was really coming back from was the Reagan recession, which took more out of the economy in two years than Carter could in four. The idling, total stall, and slow lurch forward brought down inflation, but at a cost of 600 million dollars in GNP, and about half again as much in diminished capacity over the succeeding years. It cost the average person 1000 dollars in lost income, and the average family over 3000 dollars, with a very uneven distribution of the suffering -- the lower half of society absorbed four to five times as much of the loss as the upper half did." You are amazingly rude! It's almost wondrous! What must your childhood have been like?!