Where the "deficits do not matter" mentality came. RR

I can't grasp having an ugly fat wife that is a spendthrift!

A beautiful, thin spendthrift totally plausible.

And just so you understand WTF, the poor husband in this parable is Ronald Reagan. And the ugly wife represents the big spending politicians especially the ones who came after the Clinton administration. Like Bernie Sanders.

And just so you understand WTF, the poor husband in this parable is Ronald Reagan. And the ugly wife represents the big spending politicians especially the ones who came after the Clinton administration. Like Bernie Sanders. Originally Posted by Tiny

The spendthrift sure sounds a lot like Ronnie! Spending all that money meant SS savings and leavinga bunch of IOU's! And then you and Paul Ryan can cut SS benefits because of their unsustainable costs!

"Spendthrift" derives from an obsolete sense of the word "thrift" to mean prosperity rather than frugality, so a "spendthrift" is one who has spent their prosperity.

"Spendthrift" derives from an obsolete sense of the word "thrift" to mean prosperity rather than frugality, so a "spendthrift" is one who has spent [our] prosperity. Originally Posted by WTF

Like Bernie Sanders

Have you read the Stockman article I provided? Do you understand just what Hayek is talking about? Originally Posted by WTF

I read Stockman's book, although it was many years ago. I recall him being frustrated with the system, and resigned to the fact that politicians in general are spendthrifts. His frustration wasn't directed at Reagan in particular.

I saw an interview with Art Laffer, in which he lauded Bill Clinton. He noted that the Clinton administration and Congress, mostly in his second term, balanced the budget, reformed welfare, passed NAFTA, and cut the capital gains tax. On the other side of the coin, he increased marginal tax rates. Laffer said something like, "Well, four for one ain't bad."

You should view Reagan through the same lens. He did much for our country and the world.

And then you and Paul Ryan can cut SS benefits because of their unsustainable costs! Originally Posted by WTF

You're pissed off at Reagan for increasing social security contributions and you're pissed off at Ryan for cutting SS benefits. Do you think money grows on trees?

Oh yeah, I forgot, Bernie Sanders has possessed your soul. You do think money grows on trees. Never mind.

You're pissed off at Reagan for increasing social security contributions and you're pissed off at Ryan for cutting SS benefits. Do you think money grows on trees?

Oh yeah, I forgot, Bernie Sanders has possessed your soul. You do think money grows on trees. Never mind. Originally Posted by Tiny

I'm disappointed that so many seemingly bright folks are not able to follow the money.

I followed Reagan promise to save SS with a tax increase. I then followed him taking the money and buying tanks with it. The bugger did leave a promissory note.

I then followed Paul Ryan try and take the promissory notes and want to buy stocks with them and guarantee each person that bought stock that they could keep the gains and the government would make up any losses.

I can help you too to follow the money if you'll take the first of twelve steps and admit where the problem started!

I'm disappointed that so many seemingly bright folks are not able to follow the money. (Quite an amusing statement, given that it's from someone with apparently very little ability to "follow the money!")

I followed Reagan promise to save SS with a tax increase. I then followed him taking the money and buying tanks with it. The bugger did leave a promissory note.

Yes! Really irresponsible for Ronnie to have initiated the practice of consolidating general revenues with Social Security current surpluses in order to make headline deficits appear smaller. Thanks for pointing out that he pulled off that sneaky sleight-of-hand maneuver. Most people apparently still think the prez who did that was Landslide Lyndon way back in 1968!

I then followed Paul Ryan try and take the promissory notes and want to buy stocks with them and guarantee each person that bought stock that they could keep the gains and the government would make up any losses.

I can help you too to follow the money if you'll take the first of twelve steps and admit where the problem started!

Is there a 12-step program for people who continually post links to articles from dishonest left-wing hacks like Dean Baker, and who incessantly argue about topics they don't even make the most rudimentary effort to understand? (Asking for one of our Houston friends.)
Originally Posted by WTF

.

. (Quite an amusing statement, given that it's from someone with apparently very little ability to "follow the money!")
Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian

. I've followed the money well enough to know not to argue that Reagan's Kickstart of debt to gdp ratio ,rising from 30% to 120% was a great economic accomplishment!

.
Yes! Really irresponsible for Ronnie to have initiated the practice of consolidating general revenues with Social Security current surpluses in order to make headline deficits appear smaller. Thanks for pointing out that he pulled off that sneaky sleight-of-hand maneuver. Most people apparently still think the prez who did that was Landslide Lyndon way back in 1968! Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian

Yes , it is a well known fact LBJ hid the cost of Vietnam. Why? Because back then debt and deficits mattered. My argument is that Reagan taught some of you boys that deficits and debt does not matter and the evidence is borne out in your continued denial and the actual debt to gdp ratio.

I'm not the one accusing you of being hoidwinked....the actual numbers are!

.Is there a 12-step program for people who continually post links to articles from dishonest left-wing hacks, and who incessantly argue about topics they don't even make the most rudimentary effort to understand? (Asking for one of our Houston friends.)
Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian

Your Houston friend seems not to be liking that huge left wing hack who was Ronnie's budget director kicking his ass at every attempted slight of hand.

I've followed the money well enough to know not to argue that Reagan's Kickstart of debt to gdp ratio ,rising from 30% to 120% was a great economic accomplishment!

Math whiz, are you? Well, since you fancy yourself as someone who is so good at "following the money," maybe you'd like to tell us what percentage of the nation's debt accumulation during the last forty years occurred under Ronnie's watch?

Yes , it is a well known fact LBJ hid the cost of Vietnam. Why? Because back then debt and deficits mattered. My argument is that Reagan taught some of you boys that deficits and debt does not matter and the evidence is borne out in your continued denial and the actual debt to gdp ratio.

I have not denied anything, and merely pointed out that after all the angst about deficit spending in the early '90s, we had an easy path back to sustainability -- and took it!

I'm not the one accusing you of being hoidwinked....the actual numbers are!

If anyone has been "hoidwinked" (whatever in the fuck that means!), it's you!

Your Houston friend seems not to be liking that huge left wing hack who was Ronnie's budget director kicking his ass at every attempted slight[sic] of hand.

The others you linked (such as Dean Baker) are the left-wing hacks. We already discussed Stockman. You didn't pay much attention, did you? He misrepresented and mischaracterized the policy debates of the early 1980s, since he became bitter and vengeful after being told to leave. He also had a book to promote and doom porn to peddle!
Originally Posted by WTF

You would understand this issue much better if you were to go back and read all the previous posts, at least if you took a moment to think them through and try to comprehend them.

I'm not the one accusing you of being hoidwinked....the actual numbers are! Originally Posted by WTF

If anyone has been "hoidwinked" (whatever in the fuck that means!), it's you! Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian

Perhaps this will help WTF get over his bad case of "h...oids"?

Tiny, I started a thread that is showing all the evidence points to Reagan administration as the starting point of the mentality of debt and deficits do not matter. The numbers do not lie....just look at the graph! Originally Posted by WTF

Reagan started this mentality of deficits not mattering... Reagan started the mentality of it not being a problem.... Reagan was the impetus. The numbers do not lie. Just look at the graph. Originally Posted by WTF

Sure thing, why don't we just look at a graph that goes all the way back to George Washington's day, shall we?



Still think Ronnie started it all?

Let's see... FDR was our 32nd President from 1933-1945, while Ronnie was Number 40 from 1981-89.

So what are you gonna argue now, that 32 doesn't come before 40?

You think tax cuts are the answer... You got that from Ronnie! Originally Posted by WTF

Naaahh!

We're just taking a page out of the economic playbook of a great Democrat named John Fitzgerald Kennedy!

"...Kennedy adopted the plan and put the full force of his persuasive powers into getting a big tax-rate cut through Congress... In February 1964, the Kennedy tax-rate cut won Congressional approval and became law... the nation embarked upon an eight-and-a-half year, uninterrupted run of growth at just over 5% per year...

Kennedy’s legacy was forgotten in the 1970s... One figure held fast to the Kennedy model: Ronald Reagan... As president in the 1980s, Reagan said repeatedly that his own tax cuts were taken from the Kennedy model. Reagan’s method worked stupendously, as had Kennedy’s... the nation enjoyed a long run of growth comfortably over 4% per year.

The two greatest political figures of the last 60 years gave us the model we need today, to set our great nation back in its natural groove of growth again."

https://time.com/4511870/john-f-kenn...an-tax-policy/

But the numbers have been in on Reagan and his astute economic policies and they're not good... Originally Posted by WTF

Awww shucks! There you go again!

Didn't we already have this discussion... like 8 or 9 years ago?

Shall we set the record straight... once again?

Here are but a few of the good things that happened to the economy between Jan. 1981 and Jan. 1989:

1. Inflation (CPI) slowed from 12.5% to 4.2%.

2. Unemployment dropped from 7.5% to 5.4%.

3. Total employment increased by over 16 million.

4. Employment among African Americans rose by 25%.

5. Real GDP expanded by a cumulative 31%.

6. Real per capita disposable income went up by 18%.

7. Federal tax revenues swelled by 76%.

8. The prime interest rate fell from 21.5% to 10.5%.

9. The national average price of a gallon of gasoline dipped from $1.36 to $1.00.

10. The Dow Jones Industrial Average increased by 135%. Originally Posted by lustylad

Awww shucks! There you go again! Didn't we already have this discussion... like 8 years ago? Originally Posted by lustylad

I see Professor Poofter hasn’t got any smarted in 3 months!!!!