Where is the evidence that supply side economics works better then Keynesian economics?

Question

Cons take it as gospel truth, but the facts prove otherwise.

HERE'S WHAT I DID:
I got the real GDP stats from the Bureau of Economic Analyses. I took the percent increase over 4 year intervals. I then ranked them from best to worst. Out of (((18))) 4 year intervals, the supply siders Reagan and Bush Jr ranked 8th, 12th, and 16th.


1 FDR (40') 74.69%
2 FDR (32') 34.62%
3 LBJ (64') 21.81%
4 TRUMAN (48') 21.00%
5 JFK (60') 19.86%
6 FDR (36') 19.32%
7 CLINTON (96')17.87%
8 REAGAN (84') 15.98%
9 CARTER (76') 13.67%
10 CLINTON (92')13.53%
11 IKE (52') 13.45%
12 REAGAN (80') 12.63%
13 NIXON (68') 12.38%
14 IKE (56') 10.91%
15 FORD (72') 10.62%
16 BUSH JR (00')9.03%
17 BUSH SR (88')8.81%
18 TRUMAN (44') -9.04%

http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdplev.xls


EXAMPLE CALCULATION

1996, 8,328.90 inflation adjusted billions of dollars
2000, 9,817.00 inflation adjusted billions of dollars

PERCENT CHANGE = (9817.0/8328.9 - 1.0)*100.0 = 17.87%

Answer 1

Your "question" implies that all Republicans somehow forced the U.S. to operate under supply side economics and all Democrats somehow forced the U.S. to operate under Keynesian economics. This is ridiculous.

Trying to claim your calculation of a single statistic means anything in relation to partisan politics is ridiculous. You completely ignore all historical context, thousands of economic variables, and the fact that members of the same party disagree and implement different policies. Thus your statistics and conclusions are inaccurate, invalid, and absurd.

This is nothing more than a manipulation of selective data to produce a result that you WANT to see.

Answer 2

you don't take into account the debasing of the currency or the skewed inflation numbers. your premise is false.

Answer 3

Their evidence is that there are now more millionaires than there ever was. Doesn't that make you feel better about the economy?