Mon Feb 18, 2013, 04:37 PM
egbertowillies (1,023 posts)
Stop The Myth & Letís Move On To Reality: Reaganís Policies Were A Failure
To solve a problem one must agree on facts and reality. Ramesh Ponnuruís piece ďReaganism After ReaganĒ attempts to implore Republicans to be like Reagan.
Ponnuru believes Reagan did the initial lift that brought back prosperity by reducing the top tax rate that at the time was 70%. He softy scolds Republicans for living in the past.
When Reagan cut rates for everyone, the top tax rate was 70 percent and the income tax was the biggest tax most people paid. Now neither of those things is true: For most of the last decade the top rate has been 35 percent, and the payroll tax is larger than the income tax for most people. Yet Republicans have treated the income tax as the same impediment to economic growth and middle-class millstone that it was in Reaganís day. House Republicans have repeatedly voted to bring the top rate down still further, to 25 percent.
His implication is that somehow Reaganís economic policies were already a resounding success and it is time for the GOP to come up with new ideas. Ironically, the policies he suggests for their comeback are decidedly Democratic.
A Republican Party attentive to todayís problems rather than yesterdayís would work to lighten the burden of the payroll tax, not just the income tax. An expanded child tax credit that offset the burden of both taxes would be the kind of broad-based middle-class tax relief that Reagan delivered. Republicans should make room for this idea in their budgets, even if it means giving up on the idea of a 25 percent top tax rate.
Economist Paul Krugman did not let Ponnuru get away with implicitly claiming a past success where there was none of consequence. He answered with the blog post ďThe Myth of Reaganís MiracleĒ. Krugman presents graphs that cannot be refuted.
The chart shows the real median growth in family income over time. Note that in the aggregate median income was minimal at best during Reaganís reign.
Bush1 & Clinton who actually raised taxes show a more robust median income performance. President Bush who instituted supply side economics (Reaganomics) on steroids shows an even worse performance for median income than Reagan did.
Krugmanís closing paragraph in his blog post is epic.
Ponnuru hopes to get Republicans to accept policies theyíll never accept, and the only way he knows to make his case is to invoke the memories of a politician from the quite distant past whose policies werenít all that successful in the first place.
Current policies are still biased towards supply side economics even after four years of President Obama because of a timid Democratic Congress in 2009-2010 that feared raising taxes on the wealthy. Instead of using their filibuster proof power to create a stimulus that dismantled supply side economics, they attempted a band aid solution. Ironically they lost the House and filibuster proof Senate anyway.
With an intransigent myth based Republican Party in the House and an obstructionist minority in the Senate, Reaganomics will live on till middle class and poor America clean house. One hopes the time is near.
Subscribe to my newsletter here.
1 replies, 1336 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Stop The Myth & Letís Move On To Reality: Reaganís Policies Were A Failure (Original post)
Response to egbertowillies (Original post)
Mon Feb 18, 2013, 07:21 PM
Blanks (4,343 posts)
1. The argument used to go like this...
Conservative: Reagan got the economy going again.
Liberal: Reagan only got the economy going through deficit spending.
Conservative: that's because the liberals in congress wouldn't cut spending.
This is true; the question is: would the economy have ever picked up without the spending. I believe it was the spending that stimulated the economy.
They tried to make the argument that the tax cuts were what stimulated the economy, but that doesn't hold much water since the Bush tax cuts didn't stimulate the economy (it seemed like they did, but it was because people were borrowing to live beyond their means).
We just need to accept that tax cuts beyond a certain amount provide no positive benefit to the economy. We need to look to a time when America was prosperous and have our tax code mimic that period.
The 1950's with the top marginal tax rate of 91% is the logical solution.