Ronald Reagan; Savior or Scum

[green]

Yes.

We should all be celebrating high unemployment, record underemployment, stagnant wages, record bankruptcies, and lost retirements.

Those 1950s sure sucked.

Look at the distribution of wealth. That's a huge indicator many here are refusing to acknowledge.

LOL. You are an idiot. How many tv's did the middle class have in the 70's? Now?

How many vacations to Disneyland did the middle class take in the 70's? Not as many as now.

How many cars did the middle class have in the 70's? For their kids? Not as many as now.

How big was the average sized house in the 70's? It's bigger now.

How many newly married couples went out and bought a home right away in the 70's? Not nearly as many as do now.

There is no way in the 70's someone living below poverty could afford a cellphone. They can now.

The rich are A LOT richer now than they were 30-40 years ago. So is everyone else.

You are the perfect example of the moron MSNBC, FOX, CNN, etc has created. We have never had it better than we do now, yet you believe the crap they spew out and think we have never had it worse. It's ridiculous.

More people eat better than ever before IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. More people have access to healthcare than every before. More people have more free time than ever before. More people have bigger houses, nicer cars, cell phones, televisions, satellite/cable tv, vacations, etc than EVER BEFORE.

 

[Harambe]

I think that's way over thinking things. The way I see it is we've become a nation of snooty self righteous christians who've shunned the basic tenet of the religion: forgiveness and compassion. We want to throw those dirty devils in prison and swallow the key. Forget the fact that it's immoral for a parent of a starving child to not steal to keep his child alive... forget making him a job to replace the crime... we have this ideology that free markets will save everything and these dirt bag freeloader ******** are getting in the way. Lock 'em up, close your eyes, and when you open them in the morning the market fairies will have made everything better. It's magic, God said so the Bible clearly lays out free market God said so you're turning America evil by not doing what God said in Bible.

And BTW, it's only good to have make jobs programs once their behind bars. We can't ever have FDR CCC outside of prison, only inside. Get it?

I could not agree with you more. And the article presented goes the same way at times. Making money became a religion in disguise.. something that someone decided they could silk screen right behind whichever form of Christianity you believe in. Something that somehow is magically a part of what you've always believed, and if you believe any different(ie, don't have a job, don't have a home, drive a crappy car, etc) YOU'RE A F***ING COMMIE ****STAIN ON THE BAL***** OF LIFE! BURN!.. GET OUT OF MY WORLD!!!! PRISON!

I guess now that we break it down, your statement is just level one. We don't accept others like we need to. Forgive and tolerate just don't exist right now. We abandon the principles that we so proudly lived by... that which we saw as what made us great.

And then the next step was our doom.. instead of accepting benign attitudes and actions that we perceived as "character flaws", we found ways to exclude those "afflicted" and "put away".

Third, we found ways to exploite those we've already removed from society to "better ourselves".

And fourth, creating more and more laws to further filter and identify those we "don't like", to put them in the same box as everyone else.

Carry on, good sir.

 

[♪alt13]

There is no way in the 70's someone living below poverty could afford a cellphone. They can now.

More people have more free time than ever before.

Yep Afghanistan has more cell phones than 1970's America. They are more wealthy.


No, people do not have more free time than ever before. As a matter of fact there are more households that rely on 2 incomes than ever before. Compensation(salary and wages) has gone down since the 1970's. Many things that we think as luxury items are quickly becoming necessary to function in our modern society. Lower middle class people have a hard time paying for a cell phone and internet access. Can you imagine trying to look for a job these days without those two things.

 

[Harambe]

This is really a winner bro. I think you just won the thread.

LOL. You are an idiot. How many tv's did the middle class have in the 70's? Now?

The price of technology historically drops in the long term.

How many vacations to Disneyland did the middle class take in the 70's? Not as many as now.

I haven't taken a trip to disneyland since high school with the band. I'm pretty sure I qualify as at least middle class.

How many cars did the middle class have in the 70's? For their kids? Not as many as now.

There weren't anywhere near as many running, used cars on the road in the 1970's. Nor were there parts for those cars readily available.

How big was the average sized house in the 70's? It's bigger now.

Just the same as technology, the housing industry has been able to stretch that dollar more now than they were in the 70's in both more sturdy less costly options, as well as being budget oriented.

How many newly married couples went out and bought a home right away in the 70's? Not nearly as many as do now.

Yeah bro, banks giving out crap loans that they know won't work out in the long run is great for society!

There is no way in the 70's someone living below poverty could afford a cellphone. They can now.

This is probably the dumbest line ever. In 1982 Motorola released it's $3995, Motorola DynaTAC 8000X. I don't even want to think about what that would cost in 2013 money.

The rich are A LOT richer now than they were 30-40 years ago. So is everyone else.

This is actually the smartest thing you've said. But let me alter it a bit.
The Rich are a lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot richer than they were 30-40 years ago.
The middle class is a lot lot lot richer than they were 30-40 years ago.
The poor are moderately richer than they were 30-40 years ago.

You are the perfect example of the moron MSNBC, FOX, CNN, etc has created. We have never had it better than we do now, yet you believe the crap they spew out and think we have never had it worse. It's ridiculous.

More people eat better than ever before IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. More people have access to healthcare than every before. More people have more free time than ever before. More people have bigger houses, nicer cars, cell phones, televisions, satellite/cable tv, vacations, etc than EVER BEFORE.

I don't really mean to call you out, but this is either the worst thought out response this board has ever seen, or you're a troll, you got me, and I owe you rep.

 

[Deleted member 365]

LOL. You are an idiot.

Ah yes. Beginning a post insulting another poster is always a great way to begin a helpful discussion. Your post isn't even worth responding to. And, thankfully, I've seen Roach destroy your arguments, point by point.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Ask women and African-Americans or other minorities how they felt about the 1950's.

Really? First off, it would depend on where and who you asked. I don't think many African Americans found northern and western cities very unjust. Secondly, as far as civil rights go, I would agree, we are more ahead than before. However, we are discussing economics. Specifically, the health of the middle-class. Or are you giving up already and looking to change the subject?

The current middle class maybe worse off in a relative sense compared to the top 1% but in terms of an absolute historical context your statement is absurd. I grew up in the 70's and graduated in 1981. We were solid middle class, maybe even upper middle class in comparison to our town. One TV with 3 channels, no AC in either car or the home. For most of my early childhood we owned one automobile. Our house was 3 bedrooms, one bath, one kitchen, one small dining room, one living room. Ranch style with less than 2000 square feet. 4 people.

Nothing is more persuasive than anecdotal information. "Back in my day, we walked 10 miles to the bathroom... ONE WAY!"

I've heard enough of these stories from my grandparents, thank you very much.

 

[Deleted member 365]

This right here. There is plenty of data out which suggests that every quintile is better off than it has ever been, despite the fact that the gaps between the top and middle have widened. Thriller and others operate under the fallacy of a zero-sum paradigm.

This is like using MJ or Lebron as a standard that all basketball players need to aspire to. You literally, could use this argument to justify the inequality, crony capitalism, and government corruption of any country today. Just how far are you going to take this weak argument? You easily could say, "Those in Afghanistan shouldn't complain, back 50,000 years ago, Neanderthals did x to y. Today, those types of crimes and unjust actions don't happen!"

It's unfair and completely misses the mark when we're talking about our present-day economic situation.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I find distribution of wealth without additional context to be completely meaningless.

Fair enough. I'll add more context to this. It will only make my argument stronger.

But also, lets admit that the distribution of wealth isn't completely meaningless. First of all, just basic common sense. If 1 percent owns nearly everything, what do you think that type of society is like? Secondly, basic economics, when the majority doesn't have purchasing power, what will happen to that system? First, people will go in debt. Secondly, the economy will stall (layoffs, people not purchasing the crap they make, etc). Thirdly, wages fall, the work force becomes desperate and will work for anything, the economy continues to decline... The standard of living falls. It's a vicious cycle that (for some reason) many repubs want to ignore which was so prevalent in the late 20s and 30s.

 

[Revolution 9]

Because?

Both parents working, longer age to retirement, shrinking industries, outsourcing, downsizing.

The way I see it we are losing more jobs, and finding ways to get by on less.
Everywhere you look it's happening. In the music industry I worked in. The military I work for now. Cut backs. Furloughs. Hiring Freezes.
Postal Service. Cutting back. Slashing. Less hours, less service. To save money. Cut stores, more job losses.

 

[franklin]

Agreed - the middle class has more access to easy credit and crappy stuff from Wal-Mart but I don't know if they're better off.

You'll be hard pressed to find any objective measure that says otherwise (i.e. % disposable income spent on food is in an ever downward trend).

No, people do not have more free time than ever before. As a matter of fact there are more households that rely on 2 incomes than ever before. Compensation(salary and wages) has gone down since the 1970's. Many things that we think as luxury items are quickly becoming necessary to function in our modern society. Lower middle class people have a hard time paying for a cell phone and internet access. Can you imagine trying to look for a job these days without those two things.

Because slaving over a stove, washing poop from cloth diapers, churning butter from milk fat, grinding wheat, and washing cloths on a washboard wasn't work?

Women entering the workforce was a result of wealth creation no matter how the christian conservatives or the bleeding heart liberals try to spin it. As usual, the common myth is exactly opposite of reality.

And yes, studies show that American workers in the poor and middle classes have more leisure time than in 1980. The rich did the opposite and now work longer hours.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Ok, here we go.

First off, Reaganomics. If ending the Cold War was the greatest thing to happen under Reagan, then his economic policy has got to be the worst. Yes, even worse than Iran Contra. Epic fail. They haven't worked nor will they work (since both parties essentially promote Reaganomics). What it has done to our economy over the past 30 years is horrible (for the majority of us). The deregulation, privatization, and tax cuts (which have helped erode our infrastructure and safety nets) has left us in a scary situation. Sucking money to redistribute to the top. It has left the middle-class and poor without sufficient enough buying power. You see today that in order to maintain their standards of living, many have taken on more debt. More debt?! I think even Democrats and Republicans can agree that this is a bad idea. Only bankers might enjoy this.

Secondly, because of Reaganomics, we have seen wages from the middle-class and lower class stagnate or fall. Has this been the same for the upper class? Ha! Nope. Theoretically, this isn't supposed to happen! Trickle-down, right? I mean, Mitt Romney, rich dude, is supposed to "share" his wealth by creating jobs! If he has more money, then he can afford to pay his workers more money too. This hasn't happened. And it won't happen.

Thirdly, this has created a very uncertain future. Many businesses are sitting on cash. I believe I read that Apple is sitting on billions and billions of cash because demand for their products hasn't reached the point for them to actually spend on to create jobs. They'd rather sit on the cash. And why not? The focus has shifted via Reaganomics from building a long-term stable business to essentially raiding a business, cutting labor, pumping up the stock value, impressing/deceiving the shareholders, and getting out asap before the company dies off.

Fourthly, and most importantly, without buying power the lower classes cannot dig themselves out of the hole they're in. Hence, why class mobility here in the States is one of the worst in the industrialized world. Many western European countries (and some, former USSR satellites) enjoy better class mobility than ours. Many will use globalization and technology as excuses. Foxnews is infamous for using this lame *** excuse. Doesn't Germany have to deal with globalization? Don't they have to deal with immigration too? What about technology? Isn't Europe or Japan pretty damn up to date? Yet, why do they have bigger and more healthier middle classes than we do? Why do they enjoy better class mobility? Why do their workers work less than American counterparts yet earn more?

In fact, in the 70s many of these same European countries saw less economic mobility. Meaning, if you were born poor you were most likely to die poor. Whereas, the USA was the "Land of Opportunity." Not since... The tables have turned. In these European countries the mobility has dramatically increased (despite the surge in globalization, immigration, and innovation/technology) while we have headed in the opposite direction. Why? Reaganomics doesn't work!!! Eroding the safety nets, workers' rights, regulation in the banking and finance industry, commodities market, and taxes, we have put our middle-class and poor at a significant disadvantage... While those at the top enjoy privilege.

Folks, it's because Reaganomics is one huge lie. His legacy, the vilifying of the government (but only as it pertains to workers and social programs. For safety nets for the rich, the government is their best friend. Just look at how quickly the big banks ran to nanny government in 08) and demand for everything to become privatized has left the working class as innocent fish in an ocean of Piranhas. From Bankers, insurance companies, and those controlling our commodities (like oil). Our Democracy, standard of living, and stable form of capitalism, is under attack.

 

[franklin]

This is really a winner bro. I think you just won the thread.

The price of technology historically drops in the long term.


I haven't taken a trip to disneyland since high school with the band. I'm pretty sure I qualify as at least middle class.


There weren't anywhere near as many running, used cars on the road in the 1970's. Nor were there parts for those cars readily available.


Just the same as technology, the housing industry has been able to stretch that dollar more now than they were in the 70's in both more sturdy less costly options, as well as being budget oriented.

Yeah bro, banks giving out crap loans that they know won't work out in the long run is great for society!


This is probably the dumbest line ever. In 1982 Motorola released it's $3995, Motorola DynaTAC 8000X. I don't even want to think about what that would cost in 2013 money.



This is actually the smartest thing you've said. But let me alter it a bit.
The Rich are a lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot richer than they were 30-40 years ago.
The middle class is a lot lot lot richer than they were 30-40 years ago.
The poor are moderately richer than they were 30-40 years ago.



I don't really mean to call you out, but this is either the worst thought out response this board has ever seen, or you're a troll, you got me, and I owe you rep.

I can't tell if you're agreeing with green or arguing the points. That was all really confusing.

Both parents working, longer age to retirement, shrinking industries, outsourcing, downsizing.

What a silly straw man. People retiring at 62 when life expectancy is 64 is in no way comparable to people retiring at 62.5 when life expectancy is 85 years.

The rest of your post merely described a typical recession and had little reflection on long term trends.