How did Ronald Reagan hurt the poor when he was president?

Answer 1

This question can be simply answered by taking an Economics 101 class. Reaganomics (as they may call it) basically states that tax cuts for the rich - in the hopes that the rich will invest more in capital and human resources - will stimulate the economy. However, there are flaws associated with Reaganomics.

First off, just because the government gives tax cuts to the wealthy doesn't guarantee that they will use the money to invest in capital and human resources. Many of them don't. When the rich don't invest their tax cuts in capital and human resources, the economy will not grow (or if it does grow, it'll grow slowly.) Additionally, unemployment rates will be high.

Second, cutting taxes for the rich will, most likely, create a fiscal deficit because the government is spending more money than it is taking in. Deficits lead to inflation. Inflation means increasing prices in goods. And when the poor work for less than $5/hour, they cannot afford to pay their bills and other necessities - which are goods.

So, to answer your question, Reagan did not foresee the psychological flaws in his economic plan because the rich didn't really put their tax cuts back into the economy, and his plan created inflation which made the poor even poorer.

*Anybody who says that Reaganomics doesn't favor the rich and hurt the poor are ignorant and should take an Economics 101 course before they make any comments regarding the topic.

Answer 2

Ronald Reagan taxed the working poor while lowering the tax burden on the rich. He tried to bust unions, and take away peoples right to organize. He as well as many Republicans don't believe in an open market but only one side big money (Republicans god). His economic plan failed miserably and that is why Bill Clinton won the election 4 years later remember his campaign slogan "Its the economy stupid"

Answer 3

that better not be a question asked by a teacher of yours... that would tick me off. no wonder we have so many idiots out there. Reagan just didn't cater to the welfare addicts like the dems tend to do. Sure he cut taxes for the rich but, he did it to stimulate the economy. the thought was, and still is, that if you cut taxes for the rich (and i hate using that term cause it's really people that own businesses), it would leave more money to put back into the economy, via increased wages, more people hired, expansion, and so and so on... yeah, i guess that is Reaganomics as some have so eloquently tabbed.

Answer 4

Hi,
Why are you asking this type of question? I think that the poor remain poor due to their lack of education and drive. Have you ever wondered why Asians come here and thrive? Or other immigrants that come here and thrive!? It's because they see the opportunity in front of them and take advantage of them. The poor remain poor because they lack the drive to get out of lodybar. Ask a question like...how do we get the poor to realize the opportunities that this country has, and how do we get them to do something about it without complaining. The poor remain poor due to the lack of trying. That's the truth of the matter. I see it all the time with welfare recipients. It's disgusting really. I feel the poor hurt themselves, and Ronald Reagan had nothing to do with it at all.

Answer 5

between the suitable, easily. and you ought to snigger at Marxist-Democrats who whinge approximately Reagan's deficits, whilst the government is meant to speculate in protection; yet Obama is merchandising us down a rathole by means of gifting away our money to welfare parasites. The national Debt has doubled decrease than Obama's Communist economics. however, come, Lord Jesus!

Answer 6

Maybe it was they had to respect him?

I don't remember his hurting anyone..maybe Qaddafi..
or Jimmy Carter by contrasting his total ineptitude.

what is the official DNC rhetoric of hate state about the Gipper?...which by the way was a 180 when he died..not one word that was typically demagogued during his Presidency was said . Do you think that was because they realized such behavior was totally inappropriate or their collective attention deficit had kicked in?

Answer 7

Wow, in which country? I know a lot of you are going to give thumbs down, but I don't know why...this is all well known thruth.

If you look at Latin America, his White House effectively destroyed the region and you can still see the affects of this today. He prevented democracy in the region and overthrew governments using US state-sponsored terrorism. Specifically in Nicaragua, "When asked in the US Congress in April 1985 to define US policy in Nicaragua, former CIA Director Stansfield Turner responded “state-sponsored terrorism”.

The World Court would find that this constituted state sponsorship of terrorism and an attempt to overthrow an elected government. Nicaragua decided to take their case to the World Court in Nicaragua v. United States. In an unprecedented decision in the history of world justice, the World Court sanctioned the U.S. for "unlawful use of force" for "sponsoring paramilitary activity in and against Nicaragua", ordering the U.S. government to pay billions of U.S. dollars in compensation. The World Court ordered Reagan to terminate his campaign, but the Reagan White House dismissed the ruling and then vetoed two Security Council..."

If you look to the Mid East...his administration also exported chemical weapons to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. I think we've all seen pictures of those results.

Here, in the US, his White House also pioneered the the latest way to traffic cocaine: as CRACK!

Below are two unbiased sources.

Answer 8

He was more help to the poor than any other president/.

Answer 9

He made them go to work. He was tired of the government paying afdc and welfare for people to stay home and watch TV. 40% of afdc and people on welfare where falsely reporting their situation and finally the country had a president willing to say something about it.

Answer 10

He didn't. He mobilized the work force and his tax cuts led to unprecidented growth and prosperity.