Quote:
Originally Posted by The Demon
He uh created more than 16 million jobs dude. Also, the defense spending exceeded the profits made by his economic policies. And finally, I said it worked well in the past, I didn't claim it worked miracles.
|
So lets look at the job creation.
In Reagan's first term he created 5.3 million jobs. His second term saw 10.8 million. So he created about 16.1 million jobs. Not bad. But if you look at Jimmy Carter who I think most people will agree was a pretty poor president you will find that Carter created 10.3 million jobs during his one and only term. That means Reagan's best term with all of his policies running full steam ahead only created slightly more jobs than did Carter.
If you look at Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr and you combine all of the numbers you get 20 years worth of trickle down economics. Combined they created 19.8 million jobs. That is less than Clinton who created 22.7 million.
Sure, you can argue that defense spending exceeded the profits made by the tax cuts, but that is simply a justification for what ails this country across the board no matter who is in charge. They all spend money like crazy. The republicans tend to spend it on defense and use fear as a rationalization for their spending. The democrats tend to spend it on entitlement programs and use guilt to rationalize their spending.
What I am getting at is that there is no real evidence that trickle down economics works any better for job creation than any other system. It seems like any system, if it were combined with actually spending controls, would most likely work because I feel our economy tends to do its own thing regardless of the government's tax policies.