Was the economic policy of Reagonomics considered a success in US history? Or was it a failure?

Answer 1

Supply-side economics did prove successful, in as much as it took credit for restoring the economy left behind by the Keynesian excesses that culminated in the 'staglfation' of the Carter years.

Economics isn't exactly a 'hard' science, though, and 'proof' is difficult to come by (it's hard - OK, impossible - to repeat an experiment that involves not only economic policy, but a population of 200 million - and all the technological advances and global events that were playing out at the time).

But, as far as the idea of increasing revenue by cutting taxes, yes, it's worked - it worked when Reagan did it and when Bush II did it. Now, you can question the mechanism. Did the economy go up because of the tax cut, or would it have gone up anyway, were reciepts increased because the encintive for tax avoidance was decreases, etc...

Answer 2

Chimponomics has sought after the precise 2% and of path oil agencies who've published checklist salary. We had an inflated housing industry that in basic terms crashed because of the Fed playing funds video games and a commerce deficit that has in undemanding terms made the debt worse. Dismal failure on the arms of GWB, who has bankrupted each organization he has led.

Answer 3

If you consider a success something that you learn from, then absolutely. Reagan showed that you can decrease taxes and stimulate the economy. However, he also showed that if you increase spending by too much then you will have to pay for it sooner or later. Something that hasn't been tried yet and needs to be, is to cut taxes and not increase spending at the same time--although you could go back to JFK and see some of that in practice. JFK cut taxes and got the same result as Reagan & W--increased receipts to the Treasury, without accompaning it with dramatically increased spending. Result? A stimulated economy w/o increased debt.

BTW, many of you need to learn the difference between deficit and debt as it applies to the US economy.

Answer 4

Reaganomics is a term that refers to as the failed economic policies during the Reagan administration 1981 to 1989.

Due to Reaganomics, the gap between those in the upper socioeconomic levels and those in the lower socioeconomic levels increased.

The federal debt tripled (from $930 billion on December 31, 1981 to $2.6 trillion on September 30, 1988) reaching record levels. Every president in the later half of the 20th century before Reagan reduced debt as a share of GDP.

In addition to the fiscal deficits, the U.S. started to have large trade deficits. The U.S. went from being the world's largest creditor nation to becoming the world's largest debtor nation during Reagan's second term.

Also it was during his second term that the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was passed. In 1987, the stock market lost 22% of its value on Black Monday.

Reagan's Vice President of eight years, George H. W. Bush, was elected in 1988. The early Bush Presidency's economic policies were essentially a continuation of Reagan's policies, but in the early 1990s, Bush let down many Reagan supporters by agreeing to a tax increase. Bush ended his Presidency on a moderate note, signing regulatory bills like the Americans With Disabilities Act and a law mandating that toilets use low amounts of water, and negotiating NAFTA.

In 1992, Bush and third-party candidate Ross Perot lost to Democrat Bill Clinton.

During Clinton years (1990s), GDP rose by 69%, and the stock market as measured by the S&P 500 grew more than three-fold.

Over his term, Clinton would introduce welfare reform, while spending programs were limited and government spending increases stayed relatively low.

From 1994 to 2000 real output increased, inflation was manageable and unemployment dropped to below 5%, resulting in a soaring stock market and income increased for poor, middle and upper class, which was opposite to the Reagan administration, where the income grew only for top 2% of the population.

Later when Bush came in power in 2001, economy suffered increasing at a LOW 0.3% and unemployment and business failures rising substantially, a record deficit and triggering a recession.

Here's an excellent chart http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Answer 5

A reeking, stinking, putrid FAILURE.

http://www.americanpolitics.com/20020319Hersh.html

"Economic growth indices -- GDP, jobs, revenues -- were all positive when Carter left office. All plunged after Reagan policies took effect.

Reagan didn't cure inflation, the main economic problem during the Carter years. Carter's Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker tried when he raised interest rates. That's the opposite of what Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan has done to keep inflation low.

Carter's policies and people fought inflation, but maintained real growth. On the other hand, Reagan's policies helped cause the worst recession since the Great Depression: two bleak years with nearly double-digit unemployment! Reaganomics failed in less than a year, and it took an entire second year for the economy to recover from the failure.

Carter didn't cause the inflation problem, but his tough policies and smart personnel solved it. Unfortunately for Carter, it took too long for the good results to kick in. Not only didn't Reagan help whip inflation, he actually opposed the Volcker policies!"

"Here's the truth: the total federal tax burden increased during the Reagan years, and most Americans paid more in taxes after Reagan than before. The "Reagan Recovery" was unremarkable. It looks great only contrasted against the dismal Reagan Recession -- but it had nothing to do with Supply Side voodoo.

With a red ink explosion -- $300 BILLION deficits looming as far as the eye could see -- GOP Senators, notably including Bob Dole, led the way on tax hikes. The economy enjoyed its recovery only after total tax increases larger than the total tax cuts were implemented. Most importantly, average annual GDP growth during the Reagan 80s was lower than during the Clinton 90s or the JFK-LBJ 60s!"

Answer 6

By any rational standard, Reaganomics was as dismal a failure as the entire Reagan Administration.

During his term, Reagan doubled the national debt that it had taken the first 190 years of our nation's history to accumulate, a horrific record unmatched until Bush The Lesser.

How anyone can say with a straight face that Reagan was one of our top ten presidents is unfathomable.

Answer 7

Well it helped to bring down the Soviet Empire, but inadvertantly promoted the terrorist problems we have today (see Mujahedeen, etc). It also indirectly caused the genocides in the former Yugoslavia but unity to the Germans and freedom to the Poles. So yes...and no! Remember that hindsight is always 20/20 and it's far more difficult to foresee the results of any political policy! I feel that Reagan, like Lincoln and others, did the best with what he had and went with what he knew to do what he believed were the most prudent and logical decisions!

Answer 8

No, it was a disaster because it is pure nonsense. It was merely a way to make greed seem respectable. I'm sure no scholar, economics professor or serious business person could explain it to you without bursting out laughing, it is so absurd a concept.

Basically, it translates like this: "We, the richest people, get the freedom to make as much money as we want because let's face it, God appointed us to be prosperous and quite frankly, look at you losers with your little jobs and little paychecks. You're all lazy anyway. But, to be fair about it, after we have stuffed our pockets and our suitcases with the wealth, and loaded up our car trunks , and split town with the loot, if anything falls on the floor during our getaway, that's yours. Oh, and sorry about the massive debts we left from reckless borrowing. Maybe your kids can take care of that. Frankly, we don't care."

That is Reaganomics.

Answer 9

It brought an end to the Great Economic Boom of the Carter administration.

Answer 10

A success, hands down. Anybody who tells you otherwise is either economically stupid or a Socialist.

Do some research and you will see how his plans propelled us to be the leader of the FREE WORLD.