The Deification of Reagan

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Is it valid? Is it helpful (to the GOP)?


As fallacious/revisionist as this modern day deification appears to be, why does the GOP continue doing it or refuse to discuss his legacy in real terms? Are they handcuffing themselves or helping themselves?

Yes it is helpful to the GOP. The Regan legacy is nothing more than a marketing campaign that he anchors just as Phil Knight used Jordan to sell his brand.
As it is a contrived image that they are selling it is by design beneficial to their agenda.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Yes it is helpful to the GOP. The Regan legacy is nothing more than a marketing campaign that he anchors just as Phil Knight used Jordan to sell his brand.
As it is a contrived image that they are selling it is by design beneficial to their agenda.

And I guess it works because it's uncool to criticize a dead man, particularly if he was President.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by whell

I think that's a gross oversimplification/mis-characterization of the Reagan's actions in the political landscape of the time. But there has been an on-going effort to re-write this part of our history, so the comments shouldn't surprise.

There is an ongoing effort to rewrite all of history. And the Bible as well, in case you hadn't noticed. It would seem that anyone who finds history to be inconvenient to their cause tries to "tweak" it a bit, don't they? And it's not just the left, now is it?

Dave

[whell]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

There is an ongoing effort to rewrite all of history. And the Bible as well, in case you hadn't noticed. It would seem that anyone who finds history to be incovenient to their cause tries to "tweak" it a bit, don't they? And it's not just the left, now is it?

Dave

Hmmm...did I say the left did this? Don't think I did. But glad you confirmed it.

[doucanoe]

I'm not defending Reaganomics here, but I do stand by my notions that to compare our fiscal wellness between then and now is a little unfair to say the least.

I think that we have now marched well beyond taxing being able to offset our reckless spending. This has come about in many ways but it all comes down to our ever expanding government that has resulted in over spending on both Fed and State levels. This has little to do with Reagan policies IMO.

As it has been pointed out, Bush Jr's 2 term spending spree along with Obama's (less than one term) absolute hammering of the deficit make it apparent that spending ourselves into wealth and prosperity isn't working out so hot.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by doucanoe

I'm not defending Reaganomics here, but I do stand by my notions that to compare our fiscal wellness between then and now is a little unfair to say the least.

My post wasn't intended to compare our financial wellness then and now, but to point out that the economic philosophy that started the whole ball rolling was Reaganomics (an assertion also made back then and recently by Reagan's budget director).

Due to the deification of Reagan, it has become impossible for the GOP (and even the Dem's to a lesser extent) to shed itself of his (failed) Supply-Side philosophy because of their fealty to all things Reagan.

It's a no-brainer that the government can spur economic growth by cutting taxes while increasing spending. Reagan proved it and now Obama is doing exactly the same thing. At some point, however, the bills must be paid.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by doucanoe

As it has been pointed out, Bush Jr's 2 term spending spree along with Obama's (less than one term) absolute hammering of the deficit make it apparent that spending ourselves into wealth and prosperity isn't working out so hot.

I would not say that, corporations are doing just fine, sitting on over $2 trillion in cash.

[CarlV]

Originally Posted by merrylander

I would not say that, corporations are doing just fine, sitting on over $2 trillion in cash.

...and not loaning it to small business.

Just take the no interest treasury loan and buy US debt bonds with it. Hard not to make a profit and you just need a 50 million dollar a year CEO to figure it out.


Carl

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by finnbow

And I guess it works because it's uncool to criticize a dead man, particularly if he was President.

Marketing works, it's nothing more than mass psychology.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by finnbow

My post wasn't intended to compare our financial wellness then and now, but to point out that the economic philosophy that started the whole ball rolling was Reaganomics (an assertion also made back then and recently by Reagan's budget director).

Due to the deification of Reagan, it has become impossible for the GOP (and even the Dem's to a lesser extent) to shed itself of his (failed) Supply-Side philosophy because of their fealty to all things Reagan.

It's a no-brainer that the government can spur economic growth by cutting taxes while increasing spending. Reagan proved it and now Obama is doing exactly the same thing. At some point, however, the bills must be paid.

for the hundredth time, when folks are out of work you increase benefits to those people and increase the tax on those that are working to pay for it.

Everything stays balanced and economies left un-manipulatory auto restore.