Republican economic triumphs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
herbert_hoover.jpg



Herbert Hoover (31st president) Term: 1929-33 Party: Republican

Hoover will forever be judged based on how he reacted to the Depression once it hit.

He continually downplayed the Depression in the early months, saying that the economy was “sound and prosperous” even as one million Americans were out of work by that point (before the end of Hoover’s term, the unemployment rate in this country would reach close to 25%).

He steadfastly stood against “government handouts,” which he thought would undermine American individualism and the capitalist, entrepreneurial spirit. "Handouts" meaning almost any government aid at all.

He continued to insist that recovery was “just around the corner” even as shantytowns sprouted up across the country (derisively called "Hoovervilles" by their residents).

When a large group of World War I veterans marched on Washington D.C. to demand early payment of their promised war bonuses, Hoover called out Douglas MacArthur and the U.S. Army to kick them out of town. Images of MacArthur’s tanks rolling down the streets of D.C. and WWI vets being gassed sealed Hoover’s fate in the ’32 election.


http://gonnaneedabiggerboat.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/dez-prez-rankings-rounding-out-bottom.html
 
reagan.jpg





When President Reagan, who loved to brag that he was an economics major in college, picked up Arthur Laffer's “supply side” napkin -- a sort of fortune cookie that said the lower marginal tax rates are, the higher government revenues will be -- both Reaganomics and our current econochaos were born.


Instinctively, Reagan realized that there was something on the table that looked very much like a free lunch.


This time, not so much.


The rich folk of this generation have relearned Gilded Age lessons about how Washington and tax codes work and gamed the system to split the gap between rich and poor like the Red Sea.


After four months in office, Reagan told the Congress: "High taxes and excess spending created our present economic mess. More of the same will not cure the hardship, anxiety and discouragement it has imposed on the American people."


So, a man who made his political reputation by attacking “spend and tax” Democrats invented “spend and borrow” Republicanism.


Unfortunately, Reaganomics did not work.


When Reagan became president -- and began to cut taxes -- the federal deficit was 2.5 percent of the national economy.


When he left, eight years later, the deficit was 5 percent of the economy. Interest payments on the debt jumped to $169 billion in 1988 from $69 billion in 1981.



http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat...-debts-fdr-to-bush/reagans-deficit-dreamscape
 
mitt-romney.jpg




Mitt Romney promises he can use his private-sector experience to jump-start the economy.

As governor, Romney faced his first test in applying his business background to a slow-growing economy — and data show that the results were unremarkable.

Massachusetts was one of just four states that by the time of the financial crisis still had not recovered all the jobs they had lost during the 2001 recession.

As Romney’s opponents pointed out, the state ranked 47th in job creation during his term.


Romney’s campaign says he curbed the state’s unemployment problem.


Just one state had a bigger drop in its labor force during the same period — Louisiana, which was hit by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.


There was not one measure where the state did well under his term in office.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...unremarkable/2012/02/06/gIQABzEfxQ_story.html
 
SmarterThanYou said:
awww, crap. we gotta listen to 6 more months of how much worse republicans are for the economy than dems are?
Click to expand...

You really don't have to listen to anything, dumberthananyoneIevermet. On the other hand the records really do speak for themselves and it ain't looking too good for the so called "conservative" economic models. This is gonna be GREAT!!!!!
 
Don Quixote said:
mitten's economic track record while governor speaks for itself and he has not been office since then
Click to expand...
no doubt. I predicted months ago that romney is going to be the establishment pick, despite his crappy record as governor. my issue now is i'm going to have to listen to months of bullshit on who has the worst economic record, even though both of them suck.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
no doubt. I predicted months ago that romney is going to be the establishment pick, despite his crappy record as governor. my issue now is i'm going to have to listen to months of bullshit on who has the worst economic record, even though both of them suck.
Click to expand...

Both of who? Romney and his vp pick? If you're talking about President Barack Hussein Obama you're just barking up the wrong tree. Considering the economy that President Obama was left with as well as his ambitious plans for national health coverage as well as middle class tax cuts over and again the President has done a job not less than FANTASTIC! His economic and business acumen totally exceeds anything we have ever seen in this country. And he deserves all the praise one can offer in this regard. You may not like him because he is the first black American President and only you can sort that out but claiming he has fucked up an economy that was predicted by everyone including the entire economic team of his predecessor to be going into a depression deeper than the one from 1929 is just dishonest at best but more likely just a goddamned racist lie. What the President has done is nothing short of a miracle.
 
Gatorman said:
blah blah blah, I don't care, Obama is da awesomest, blah blah blah
Click to expand...

none of which explains his ridiculous handling of the economy and none of it is better, except for wall street. which makes no sense to watch you morons fawn all over his handling of the economy while you bitch about wall street and corporatism. Do y'all even see the retarded hypocrisy you spew?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
none of which explains his ridiculous handling of the economy and none of it is better, except for wall street. which makes no sense to watch you morons fawn all over his handling of the economy while you bitch about wall street and corporatism. Do y'all even see the retarded hypocrisy you spew?
Click to expand...

If you're going to erase my words from a quote and insert your own juvenile bullshit this indicates a total weakness and total breakdown in your own argument. If that is how you intend to converse on this topic I suggest you find yourself another 3rd grader to talk with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top