[Video] Rand Paul, Reagan Republican

[cajuncocoa]

Reagan doesn't deserve it, but Boobus worships him. That's why this video is awesome...not because Reagan himself was.

 

[erowe1]

He and Margaret Thatcher did more for freedom than any almost leaders in world history. And I would put them in the same category as Friedman and Hayek in terms of their tangible accomplishments in making the world freer. Results matter and it is hard to argue with what Reagan accomplished looking back at history. It is hard to imagine how much poorer and less free the world would have been without Reagan. I would say we can't afford not to have another Reagan. The reason I have been excited about Rand is that I see him as a more principled and more philosophically libertarian version of Reagan

In 1988 Americans were less free than they were in 1981. Yes results matter. We have to do better than that.

 

[erowe1]

He dramatically cut both rates (which is most important) and actual revenue.

This is false. He did not cut revenue, not even when you exclude the revenue of borrowed and printed money (i.e. deficits, which are just another kind of tax).

Federal receipts in 1981 (in 2009 dollars) were 1,364.2 billion. Federal receipts in 1988 (in 2009 dollars) were 1,558.2 billion.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

 

[Zippyjuan]

He was a disappointment only to those who live in fantasy world who will whine anyone in charge.

He certainly wasn't perfect but he was the exact right person for the job at exactly the right time. He beat inflation, cut taxes, and put a regulatory freeze that created the greatest upward economic boom in world history over the next 20 years. I get all the arguments against him. It still doesn't change the fact that he was best President since Coolidge.

The Fed fought inflation with very high interest rates which hit 20%- a recession followed- Reagan didn't get to vote on the matter. Reagan did sign a tax cut bill (Congress writes tax and spending bills- not Presidents) but he also signed others after that (because the deficit was starting to soar from the cuts in government revenues) which were at the time the highest tax increases in US history. http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/ Expanded Medicare too. Government spending grew at its fastest pace (much of it going to nuclear weapons and other defense spending).

 

[Krugminator2]

The Fed fought inflation with very high interest rates which hit 20%- a recession followed- Reagan didn't get to vote on the matter. nuclear

Okay. Yes. I get that he didn't have a vote on monetary policy. Except he really did. Milton Friedman in numerous interviews gives Reagan the credit for allowing Volcker to take draconian measures to get inflation under control, which he knew would be politically unpopular because it would slow the economy.

I also get that tax and spending bills originate in Congress. Think about it this way. Look at the policies Jimmy Carter pursued. Carter said Reagan's tax cuts would be hyperinflationary in the debates. Does cutting taxes sound like a policy the Carter administration would have enacted? Reagan sort of ran on it. Remember "Voodoo economics"? Carter's administration had loose monetary policy and contractionary fiscal policy. That is exact opposite of what Reagan ran on and his economic advisors advocated. It wasn't just a matter of happenstance that those policies came into being when Reagan took office.

As far spending and entitlements. I don't think he was great on that. I said he wasn't perfect. But even then with a Democratic Congress that shut the government down 7 times in budget battles, spending as a share of GDP dropped significantly form '83 to the end of his Presidency and trended down until 2000.

 

[Krugminator2]

This is false. He did not cut revenue, not even when you exclude the revenue of borrowed and printed money (i.e. deficits, which are just another kind of tax).

Federal receipts in 1981 (in 2009 dollars) were 1,364.2 billion. Federal receipts in 1988 (in 2009 dollars) were 1,558.2 billion.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

The tax cut was passed in 1982. Tax receipts fell in 1983. That was what I was referring to. I assumed that was obvious. Even if you want to look at revenues during his Presidency, the better way is took at revenues as a share of the economy. They were 19% when he took office and 17.5% when he left. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

And I am assuming you are trolling with the Carter and Ford stuff. Horrifically bad Presidents. No need to continue with this.

 

[erowe1]

The tax cut was passed in 1982. Tax receipts fell in 1983. That was what I was referring to. I assumed that was obvious.

Why would you only pick out one part of his presidency and not the whole thing? That makes no sense.

Even if you want to look at revenues during his Presidency, the better way is took at revenues as a share of the economy.

That is not a better way. It's a much worse way. GDP went up along with revenue. So as a share of GDP, revenue didn't go up. But he still increased revenue, even when accounting for the falling dollar. If he had not done that, then revenue as a share of GDP would have gone down significantly, and he would still be able to spend just as much without increasing deficits.

And I am assuming you are trolling with the Carter and Ford stuff. Horrifically bad Presidents. No need to continue with this.

I never denied that they were horrifically bad. But no, I wasn't trolling. I only said that, as horrifically bad as they were, they weren't as bad as Reagan. They really both accomplished hardly anything, especially Ford. And, since all modern presidents' accomplishments are more bad than good, those who accomplished the least are the least bad overall.

If you have some evidence to the contrary, I'm open to seeing it.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Great video!

Right, it doesn't matter what people here think of Reagan... it matters what old GOP voters in Iowa think of him.

Exactly

And, in any case, the comparison to Reagan was mostly about foreign policy (let's be strong, but let's not fight a bunch of ground wars in Asia).

On that front, Reagan actually was pretty good. He too was called soft on defense by the neocons of the day.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Foreign Policy Reagan included Iran Contra (trading guns and drugs for hostages). We had CIA running operations though out South America fighting drugs and supporting right wing leaders. We bombed Lybia and invaded Grenada. He attacked some Iranian oil platforms with missiles. Overthrew Manuel Noriega in Panama. Aided fighters in Afghanistan against the Russians. Started and spent billions on "Star Wars"- trying to develop "killer satellites" which could shoot down nuclear warheads. The program has still only seen limited success in very controlled tests after $trillions being spent on it.

The S&L crisis was on his watch- more savings and loans went out of business than during the Great Recession.

 

[erowe1]

Foreign Policy Reagan included Iran Contra (trading guns and drugs for hostages). We had CIA running operations though out South America fighting drugs and supporting right wing leaders. We bombed Lybia and invaded Grenada. He attacked some Iranian oil platforms with missiles. Overthrew Manuel Noriega in Panama. Aided fighters in Afghanistan against the Russians. Started and spent billions on "Star Wars"- trying to develop "killer satellites" which could shoot down nuclear warheads. The program has still only seen limited success in very controlled tests after $trillions being spent on it.

The S&L crisis was on his watch- more savings and loans went out of business than during the Great Recession.

Exactly, the foreign policy of every president since Reagan has been worse than his. But his bellicosity is precisely what made him worse than Ford and Carter.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Foreign Policy Reagan included Iran Contra (trading guns and drugs for hostages). We had CIA running operations though out South America fighting drugs and supporting right wing leaders. We bombed Lybia and invaded Grenada. He attacked some Iranian oil platforms with missiles. Overthrew Manuel Noriega in Panama. Aided fighters in Afghanistan against the Russians.

...which is to say that US foreign policy was much more restrained under Reagan than it's been since 2001.

...and that's when the enemy was a real military power with tens of thousands of ICBMs (as opposed to some RPG-toting cave-dwellers in central Asia).

I'm no Reagan fanboy, but let's give credit where credit is due. Had the neocons of that era had their way, we might be shadows on the sidewalk.

 

[Hypnowheel]

It's all about the target viewer

Right, it doesn't matter what people here think of Reagan... it matters what old GOP voters in Iowa think of him.

ding-ding-ding!

This video was made to persuade Trump/Cruz/Rubio supporters. You guys are already on board.

 

[DJH73]

ding-ding-ding!

This video was made to persuade Trump/Cruz/Rubio supporters. You guys are already on board.

I was about to say that Reagan is a big reason we charted a course for 20 trillion in debt, but then I thought whats the difference, if it gets votes, sounds good to me.