Liberal Forum

RichClem » 18 Feb 2014 6:27 pm » wrote:
Oh, so you have no idea what the conditions were. Thanks for admitting that.

Inflation that peaked at roughly 12%.

A recession Carter's last year in office.

A Prime Rate that exceeded 20%.

Plummeting incomes his last couple years in office.

A rising Misery Index, that fell under Reagan.

Those numbers are virtually meaningless. They tell us only what the change was in two arbitrarily selected metrics. Both metrics are quite important to the economy, granted. But neither separately, nor both together, are the last word on the economy. There is strong evidence that the economist who made up the measure was a gay, but I am withholding that evidence against the day that I am on a committee that puts that man on a train to a labor camp.

Carter's actual average was 16.26 and Reagan's average was 12.9. Reagan was able to finish absorbing the pain which Carter inherited from Johnson's and Nixon's currency decisions and the Johnson/Nixon debacle in Vietnam. Carter had already eaten half the pain when Reagan came on - and Reagan had a second term or his "misery index" would be worse than Carter's - and I can easily prove that.

That Reagan worked his "magic" by tripling the debt and growing the government and employing Keynesian stimulus is ALSO an economic issue. But you will just go blind on those issues. And you keep refusing to say who hired those hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats - Reagan, or Tip O'Neil?