Ronald Reagan

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
3. Perfect in every possible way

You and Mary Poppins. The only two of your kind.

[gopher]

*doing the threadjacking dance, doing the threadjacking dance*

Well, since Reganomics was based on a curve written by a half-buzzed man on the back of a cocktail napkin, brought NO benefit to Americans, and was fortunate enough to occur during an oil glut which lowered fuel prices and subsequent inflation, I have to go against Regan.
Plus, Clinton's scandal involved mouthation of the wang, while Regan's involved handing over foreign policy to a bunch of lower echilon people who gave missiles to a country who gives us the cute nickname "Great Satan" for the purpose of circumventing a Congressional ban on money to a brutal guerrila army, it's not a tough choice.
And, to finish off:
SDI
Cut Social Services
Dereg
Tax Cuts
Nancy

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Ethelred


You and Mary Poppins. The only two of your kind.

Mary Poppins isn't perfect... she doesn't 'put out'.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by MrBaggins


Mary Poppins isn't perfect... she doesn't 'put out'.

Try telling that to the chimney sweeps. What do you think they were so enthralled with her for?

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Ethelred


Try telling that to the chimney sweeps. What do you think they were so enthralled with her for?

She was just their drug dealer. What do you think she kept in that handbag?

No way would intercourse happen with all those layers and buttons and hooks. The Victorians were into bondage, socially, in a HUGE way.

[Akka]

Nationalist ?

Are you aware that while you say you're right-winged in your political opinion, you've been defending purely left-winged ideas in this whole thread ?

Come to the light, man, we'll show you the way

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

True, but does it make sense when you're increasing spending to slash your income by giving staggering tax cuts to the ultra-wealthy?

Also had to drag the economy out of recession at the same time.

1981 Tax cuts enacted.
1982 Recession sets in.

You figure out which is the cause and which is the effect.

[Spiffor]

Imran :
I bow before your economical fundamentalism and close-mindedness. You believe absolutely in the "scientific theories" liberal economists write, with no reguards for the real world. You seem to think we live under the pure and perfect competition system. That everything decided is a question of percentages, taxes and so on.

Let me give you an example : when Daimler and Chrysler financially merged, they didn't merge their executive staff, their factories and so on ? Why ? Simply because the German and American management methods were different, because it takes time to move a factory from one place to another, because German and American workers were competent at their work etc. It's called concrete reasons. You seem to forget them to focus only on figures. Thus you prove you didn't understand anything to economy, like V. Hayek or Laffer.

[Spiffor]

Oh, BTW, about Reagan :
Voted 2 : he's a complete ass, demagogue, he bears responsibility for bring Friedman's dangerous ideas to the world (like Thatcher), promoted fascist dictatorships in the whole world while presenting himself as the hero of the "free world".

He didn't win the cold war, the USSR lost it because of internal problems, mostly economic. The military expenses were a way to counter-balance his catastrophic economic decisions, with a keynesian pump-up.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
Nationalist ?

Are you aware that while you say you're right-winged in your political opinion, you've been defending purely left-winged ideas in this whole thread ?

Come to the light, man, we'll show you the way

I'm socially right wing. Economically I'm anti-Socialism, but I don't hold free market Capitalism up as being an unalterable. unquestionable God. I'm for the working man Reaganomics ****ed over my dad (a steelworker) along with millions over other working men. Thanks to him, my family was pushed into welfare for a few years.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Imran . . . You believe absolutely in the "scientific theories" liberal economists write . . .

Er...if you're calling Imran a liberal, I feel a libel suit coming on.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


Er...if you're calling Imran a liberal, I feel a libel suit coming on.

He's not referring to liberal/conservative, but using economic terms liberal (free-market)/command (Communist) economy. Reagan was a Republican, meaning a political conservative but a economic liberal.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by nationalist
He's not referring to liberal/conservative, but using economic terms liberal (free-market)/command (Communist) economy. Reagan was a Republican, meaning a political conservative but a economic liberal.

Whew for a moment there I thought he'd gone mad.

('cept now you're using Reagan and liberal in the same sentence. O my poor brain. )

[Spiffor]

Sorry. Here in France, the term "liberal" only refers to economy and the belief in free markets, not to the moralistic position (we opppose "conservatives" to "progressists" then). So, with the French terms, Reagan was ultraliberal and unltraconservative, like Thatcher

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Spiffor
He didn't win the cold war, the USSR lost it because of internal problems, mostly economic.

You disagree with most people who observed the disintegration of the Soviet bloc.

Just why do you think they fell apart economically at that time? Could it have been that they burned out trying to keep up with American military spending? Could it be that their leadership lost the will to continue in the face of the determination of the West as evidenced by Reagan and Thatcher? Nahh.