US coming into a Recession

But now the bailed out bankers own the homes of the people who lost them, and rent them back at much higher costs. And that's what really counts.
Bankers are akin to benevolent gods, and deserved to be saved from their own mismanagement

 

Reagan request less spending than Congress authorized every year in office. Trump has been proposing budget cuts from day one.

What policy?

 

Should have cut spending as promised.
All politicians are whores and deserve to lose

 

He could have refused, and should have.

 

Reagan spent money like a princess with a credit card - just like Trump is doing.

 

Clusterfuk?

 

The recessions of 2001 and 2007 were by far caused by very bad GOP policies in the house from 1994 to 2006.

 

Wrong and a dodge try again

The question is who is better adept at dealing with the slowdown and possible recession. We can compare the Republicans in the late 1990's early 2000's leading to the 2001 recession and the Democrats 2007 forward leading to the 2008 recession. Care to do that?

 

So, to your point, the wheels both aren't falling off, and the economy will be fine. Thanks for outlining how you believe that to be the case...

 

Reagan requested LESS spending every year than Congress authorized and the Congress did not pass all the spending rescission he sent to them. Had Congress accepted his budgets and rescisions the deficits would have fallen to under $100B. Trump has offered budget cuts every year.

CONGRESS controls the budget and spending. Heck you guys wanted Trump impeached for not spending money Congress had allocated saying it was against the law for him NOT to spend it.

 

Refused what?

 

Sure. If you’re willing to do a deep dive into what was proposed and the then implemented at each interval. That would uncover what measures were advocated and opposed by whom.

 

Just go with what they did and what were the results and tell me which would be best to pass policies to help mitigate the depth the length of any up coming recession.

 

I think they are falling off - it is likely in the degree that we differ. In the grand scheme of things we are losing market share - albeit that market has grown !? Now there is a whole lot more competition - and competition for capital.

We have - of late - engaged in some very strong arm tactics to try to maintain market share. The Trade deals were OK ... as was the push to reduce the amount of stupid and unnecessary regulation.

The blunder was Iran - not pulling out of the deal.. that's just politics - (although I think that was a blunder - but not the one I want to get at)
Not the Unilateral Sanctions -

The blunder was using the "Nuclear Option" to force other nations into submission and compliance with those "Unilateral" Sanctions
Literally declaring economic war on most of the nations in the world that matter - including our best economic allies - in the chase for this Pie.

(Nuke Option is threatening to block banks/corps out of the US run system of international payments)

The nations of the world revolted - While we have been going around trying to club nations into submission .. Russia and China have been going around doing deals. Well - and everyone else.

Imagine if some nation messed with our sovereignty - how would the citizens react ? Heck - look how we reacted over Russiagate ? a FB ads and some hacked emails. Imagine some nation came and directly intervened in our sovereignty.. Do this or else ... threatening to shut our banks out of the system - putting them out of business.

None too happy would you be...but your nation complies ... albeit with the strongest of protest. If you are a purchaser - are you going to award the contract to this Nation if given a choice ? - or make decisions favorable to that nation if you are Politician? - the voters watching your every action closely with respect to anything related to this nation that has just clubbed us.

We used to just whisper our desires - and nations would come running to comply - because we were the only economic game in town - and everyone wanted to play.

Now - we come barging through the door with a big stick in hand - and the response - FU. The comply - because they are forced to - but they will hit back in other ways.

Would you like a list ? Nordstream - Germany, Italy - Belt and Road, EU -Huawai 5G, India - S400 - same with Turkey.

We have lost Iraq. The Syria and Iraq will be rebuilt by China-Russia -Iran. Oman Qatar are sympathetic to Iran - El Saud sells more of its oil to China than to the US. Turkey - is playing both sides of the fence.

Venezuela will be rebuilt by China-Russia .. South and Central American Nations are looking favorably at "Belt and Road". Africa is generally a mess - and up for grabs.

Afghanistan is an interesting one .. that is a main energy corridor route - as is Syria - the main reason for destabilizing both nations. This Energy Corridor has been labeled "The new Silk Road" into the energy hungry India/China market.

Russia has the Syria Portion - Pakistan is looking favorably at the China-Russia Consortia (and needs to mediate the India problem)

Which brings us to India - a Nation we used to be on the best of terms with - and we still are OK - but India is dealing with China Russia on many fronts.

Lastly - back to the "nuclear option" - we were given the privilege - we were "Allowed" to have the US dollar as the sole world reserve currency. The benefit of this can not be understated. We were given a position of Trust on the basis that we would not abuse that Trust.

The world in general has been clamoring for an alternative for more than a decade - prior to the 2008 crash - but after the crash the calls became louder. Some steps were taken - like the EU creating Special Drawing Rights "SDR"s - these can only be used by Nations - not corporations or individuals. baby steps - but steps.

China introduced the Petro Yuan - and China-Russia have been working on a viable alternative - so this has been a long time in coming but - what we didn't need is for this process to be expedited - and using the Nuke option did just that.

Solution ? disarm the nuke.

The day that there is a valid competitor to the US system of payments - will be the day the History Books will record as the defacto end of the US Economic Empire.

 

Call it Rotten Ronnie and Red Congress if you like - it matters not - Reagan may say "I want Cuts" - like Trump and every good politician does - but at the end of the day the President signs off on the spending - and typically the Administration has a fair bit of sway as to what Red Congress is up to .

So spare me the sob story. It is true that there are times when black swan events require spending - The Reagan era was not one of them.

 

How about Absurd Extremes?? Or an appeal to such.....that's a good name

 

Well DUH eventually budgets have to be signed and don't even try to hint that you would support complete government shutdowns as Democrats fight for higher spending and Republicans lower spending. Presidents DO NOT CONTROL THE BUDGET. Yea if the get both houses of Congress they are given greater defference but the fact remains Reagan was not the driver of the higher spending Congress passed. If fact it was Clinton through his presidency was the only President who requested more spending than Congress authorized. And you ignore the spending rescissions Reagan submitted that were turned down. You don't judges budgets by who sits in the Oval Office you judge them by which party is in control.

 

BS.

Obama left with a weak slow growing economy, it went boom under Trump and the rug is getting pulled out from under us by circumstances beyond our control..

 

Dear Trump fans - welcome back to the real world.

 

Red President - Red Congress - either way - the GOP - like Princesses with Credit cards they were. The Reaganomics was not invented by Reagan ...

 

Lie.

Reagan tried to cut the budget. The Dems in Congress protected the Welfare Queens and wouldn’t agree to the cuts.

 

Sign their budget bills

 

Reagan signed the budgets which means he eventually agreed with them. He could have forced Congress to over-ride his veto. He did not.

 

It is not a lie - get a grip - it is economic history. The President has to sign off on spending - any Politician can express a desire to cut - like Trump did - that and actually reigning in spending - are two different things.

You can blame Red congress if you like - but it makes little difference as they were running the show. The Reagan Administration ran massive deficits. That is historical economic fact.

 

If the Dems had the votes, there was no point in a veto.

Why would the Dems not go along with the cuts? They like deficits?

Actually, Republicans never seek real “cuts”. When they propose slower growth in government programs (5% annually instead of 10%), the Dems always demagogue the issue and say the Republicans are proposing “draconian cuts”.