Why did that backwood redneck Ronald Regan cut good social Programs?

Question

OK I KNOW IT WAS IN PART TO INCREASE THE DEFENSE BUDGET TO DEFEAT THE SOVIETS, BUT THESE WERE GOOD PROGRAMS AND SHOULD BE BROUGHT BACK, AND IF ADOLPH HITLERS SON (BUSH) NEVER STOLE THE ELECTION GORE WOULD HAVE BEEN PRESIDENT AND WE WOULD NOW HAVE MORE JOBS THAN PEOPLE

Answer 1

Reagan was not a backwoods redneck which shoots your entire babbling rant into the sewer.

But just for laughs... tell me how we don't have more jobs than people... we have 4.5 percent unemployment and almost 30,000,000 illegal aliens employed. We have enough jobs, people have to put down their Twinkies, get off their couches and get one.

If Reagan eliminated a social program and Clinton didn't restore it when he had control of the House and Senate how would Gore have restored anything when he would have had a Republican House and Senate. If we've done without the program for the last generation we don't need it now.

Answer 2

There is no such thing as a good social program at the federal level. They are all forms of slavery. Where is the good of helping 1 person when the cost is forcing pain upon hundreds?

Bush did not steal any elections. It has been documented by every (credible) media source. Even the ones that hate him like CNN and the New York Times. Look it up.

We have unemployement of 4.7%. That's fantastic and better than any socialist country (European avg unemployement is 11%).

Answer 3

Yes, Reagan cut good programs.

His philosophy was to cut programs (except the military); and when he couldn't cut, he sabotaged.

That fit his political (and presumably personal moral) philosophy; he saw it as an ounce of pain today to save a pound of worse pain in the future.

Some of us may argue that he threw the baby out with the bathwater, though, in cutting the wrong items, or items that would (or should have) cut governmental dependency in the long run, but if you're a true conservative and don't believe even those sorts of programs were something the government should be doing, well, there you go.

He was no backwood redneck, BTW. You may choose to dislike him, and his philosophy (so do I, in fact), but one can do it without misrepresentations.

Answer 4

Yes it's all set-up from beginning to end! Palms being greased, secrets being kept, promises being made; backs being stab! It's work in process! Not work in progress! I just get so out of it when I read some news about what was done in history past and how similar incidents are still occurring today. It make me literally ill! And this is why for years I do not watch the news anymore! All I want to know is the weather and the time! I don't give 2 sh/ts about what's going on in the news because there is nothing hardly to celebrate anymore! But then I on the Internet everyday and I have to see the headlines! Curious a*s me has to do the click thingy to see what the hell happened and where! I'm just so ill! LOL! I'm just f*cking ill!

Answer 5

No, they were not good programs. As for your assertion that under Gore we would have more jobs than people...

1) How is that even possible?

2) 0% unemployment is a BAD thing. It creates economic chaos, and uncontrollable inflation.

However, the fact that you refer to Bush as "ADOLPH HITLERS SON" only means these words are lost on you and your delusional fantasies.

Answer 6

Wow.

No, if Gore (who I voted for) succumbed (which he would have) to pressure from his hair-brained DNC associates, he would have ramped up social spending at the EXPENSE of defense (a la Bill Clinton, who I also voted for). There has to be responsibility and accountability in social programs, which there is not. There is just a free for all feeding frenzy on tax dollars paid by hard-working Americans, which are then doled out to people in need (a subset that is somehow growing, despite all the aid to provided people in need).

Jobs rely on corporations and self-employed individuals. Social programs thrive on the taxation of these two entities. SO HOW do you expand social programs AND create more jobs than people???? By keeping the borders WIDE open? NOPE. By taxing corporations and the wealthy, who create most jobs? NOPE. You support business, ethical business, and you support the constant reduction of taxation, so more jobs are available and more money is MADE by people rather than PAID out by the government. It's not a bottomless pit, we shouldn't look to government to help anyone, it's NOT THEIR JOB.

Answer 7

Part one of your question: there is no such thing as a good social program. The government shouldn't have to support anyone that is freely capable of supporting themselfs. Secondly don't go and repeat news headlines about Bush. The media is well known to have a liberal bias, so you really need to do your homework and get both sides first. Failure to do so, just shows your ignorants.

Answer 8

So, then we could let more illegals in to have those jobs, right?

I think not. The economy is great, and calling Bush that name really detracts from any legitimacy your argument could have. Bush won twice. Not just once.

Reagan did what he had to do to reign in the rampant overspending of Carter. The programs he cut were redundant and unnecessary. And, it was 20 years ago, get over it.

Answer 9

even in spite of the indisputable fact that human beings Say that's because of the fact they like interest. Its a final Cry For help & Suicide Is The very final Cry For help That Cant Be spoke back. My Sister Used to cut back Her Wrist's & ultimately She Overdosed & grow to be On existence help for 2 Days, whilst She awakened & Had all of the Tubes bumped off! the 1st undertaking She reported To My Mum, grow to be you might have enable Me Die Mum. Thats What i wanted.!! She Has Been clinically determined With Borderline character ailment Which, is quite complicated to handle Very complicated For Her To stay With & Very complicated For the folk round her. & there grow to be a great reason For my Sister's Erge To Die (Im not arranged To launch That preparation on the information superhighway To the international) yet human beings Shouldnt choose people who cut back! because of the fact each individual Has a narrative, a narrative That They Dont prefer You to be attentive to approximately, Or a narrative that they are loss of life so which you would be able to envision so which you comprehend Them & Care, & Others might Die to cover It.! yet till you have examine That tale Dont Make judgements You Cant back Up. It Isnt your place to choose Them! wish This helps.x

Answer 10

Because he had a habit of cutting and chopping things although WOOD the most of times.Air Force One was hauling him and Nancy almost every weekend to his ranch so that he can chop some wood ,What a waste of public funds!