Reagan insider: 'GOP destroyed U.S. economy'

[BigD_95]

Source: Wall St Journal / Market Watch

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "How my G.O.P. destroyed the U.S. economy." Yes, that is exactly what David Stockman, President Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed piece, "Four Deformations of the Apocalypse."
Get it? Not "destroying." The GOP has already "destroyed" the U.S. economy, setting up an "American Apocalypse."

Stockman rushes into the ring swinging like a boxer: "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation's public debt ... will soon reach $18 trillion." It screams "out for austerity and sacrifice." But instead, the GOP insists "that the nation's wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase."

Stockman says "the second unhappy change in the American economy has been the extraordinary growth of our public debt. In 1970 it was just 40% of gross domestic product, or about $425 billion. When it reaches $18 trillion, it will be 40 times greater than in 1970." Who's to blame? Not big-spending Dems, says Stockman, but "from the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."

Finally, thanks to Republican policies that let us "live beyond our means for decades by borrowing heavily from abroad, we have steadily sent jobs and production offshore," while at home "high-value jobs in goods production ... trade, transportation, information technology and the professions shrunk by 12% to 68 million from 77 million."
As the apocalypse draws near, Stockman sees a class-rebellion, a new revolution, a war against greed and the wealthy. Soon. The trigger will be the growing gap between economic classes: No wonder "that during the last bubble (from 2002 to 2006) the top 1% of Americans -- paid mainly from the Wall Street casino -- received two-thirds of the gain in national income, while the bottom 90% -- mainly dependent on Main Street's shrinking economy -- got only 12%. This growing wealth gap is not the market's fault. It's the decaying fruit of bad economic policy." Get it? The decaying fruit of the GOP's bad economic policies is destroying our economy.

Read more: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-2010-08-10?pagenumber=1

[rocktivity]

1. Candidate for this year's "You Call This NEWS?" Award

And from Dave Stockman, no less--the very guy who admitted that it was a crock in the first place.

The other day, I wondered why his name had suddenly popped up. So he's promoting a book--money must be getting tight, even for him.

:eyes:
rocktivity

[Raster]

33. At least someone is FINALLY SAYING IT!

Yes, damn it, this is news, and it should be force-fed to every network and television station 24 hours a day until every American KNOWS why this country is falling apart!

But in all honesty, the G.O.P. had plenty of Democratic collaborators eager to help suck the country dry.

There may be two political parties in D.C., but they both feed from the same trough.

"There's a reason that education sucks, and it’s the same reason it will never ever ever be fixed. It’s never going to get any better, don’t look for it. Be happy with what you’ve got. Because the owners of this country don’t want that. I’m talking about the real owners now, the big, wealthy, business interests that control all things and make the big decisions.

Forget the politicians, they’re irrelevant.

Politicians are put there to give you that idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land, they own and control the corporations, and they’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the State Houses, and the City Halls. They’ve got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies so they control just about all the news and information you get to hear.

They’ve got you by the balls.

They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else. But I’ll tell you what they don’t want—they don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s against their interest. You know something, they don’t want people that are smart enough to sit around their kitchen table and figure out how badly they’re getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago.

They don’t want that, you know what they want?

They want obedient workers, obedient workers. People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork and just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it.

And now they’re coming for your social security money.

They want your fucking retirement money; they want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it all from you sooner or later because they own this fucking place. It’s a big club and you ain’t in it! You and I are not in the Big Club. By the way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you in the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to believe, what to think and what to buy.

The table is tilted folks, the game is rigged.

Nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care. Good honest hard working people, white collar, blue collar, it doesn’t matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard working people continue, these are people of modest means, continue to elect these rich cocksuckers who don’t give a fuck about them. They don’t give a fuck about you. They don’t give a fuck about…give a fuck about you! They don’t care about you at all, at all, at all.

And nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care.

That’s what the owners count on, the fact that Americans are and will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white, and blue dick that’s being jammed up their assholes everyday. Because the owners of this country know the truth, it’s called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.

George Carlin, 2005

[RaleighNCDUer]

48. The repubs couldn't have done it without being abetted by the DLC. nt

[Raster]

78. Absolutely! Collaborators and accomplices.

Corporatist swine, both the GOP and their DLC enablers.

[disndat]

92. Yes, the DLCers and Schumer.

Schumer single handedly caused the Wall Street meltdown. There is in the new New Yorker, an article by Jeffrey Toobin on Schumer, is a must-read along with this op-ed article by Stockman. Schumer successfully de-regulated all the restraints on Wall Street. He eviscerated the S.E.C. and credit rating agencies, like Standard and Poor's and Moody's Investor's Service. Now that Alan Greenspan is ex-chairman of the Federal Reserve, he just come out last week asking Obama to cut back on tax cuts for the wealthy - a rather ominous sign. Greenspan must see economic disaster coming and now wants to be on the right side of history.

[Larry Ogg]

87. No truer words could be spoken, and vise versa...

Although IMHO, 100% of the elected officials within the Republican Party, have been recruited, and have character traits appealing to predators (aka psychopaths), which is necessary to be the malevolent puppets of the elite predator class. But the same could be said about much of the Democratic Party which, to the Parties credit, has yet to be totally purged of humans who have a conscience. But still the problem is so bad that it’s becoming more common for people to talk about “…The Illusion of Two Parties…” And the purpose of this illusion is for each side to hide behind the facade of bipartisan ignorance while making deals with the devil, and because the predator class is by far the beneficiary of most political deals, we can conclude the devil has many mansions, while the working class is waking up homeless…

[phasma ex machina]

102. +1 "The repubs couldn't have done it without being abetted by the DLC."

And neither party could've done it without being abetted by the people. People who want something for nothing.

DUers typically blame the military costs of virtual empire while the opposition blames social programs.

From a financial perspective a military contractor is the same as a social services contractor. Only the morality differs.

But, in the end, both endeavors drain the public treasury.

[The Green Manalishi]

121. Brilliant

"From a financial perspective a military contractor is the same as a social services contractor. Only the morality differs."
Well said!

[MajorChode]

123. Stockman has been saying similar things for a long time

Many years ago, he admitted that 'supply-side', 'trickle down' or whatever they are calling it these days was never anything more than a Trojan horse for tax cuts for the wealthy.

Prior to Raygun, Republicans who wanted tax cuts always had to look for ways to pay for them, which meant you had to cut something. Post Raygun you just give away tax cuts without worrying about deficits. They sold the idea that there was indeed such a thing as a free lunch and plenty of useful idiots bought it.

[Raksha]

134. That George Carlin quote is a classic...

thank you for reposting it. The one line that MIGHT (hopefully) be a little bit dated is "And nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care."

I think FINALLY people are starting to notice how they've been screwed, and who's been screwing them. Now that they are finally coming after Social Security--which scares the crap out of me since my SS widow's pension is my sole source of income--people are finally starting to wake up. Hopefully it won't be too late.

[musette_sf]

36. And this is NEWS??? +1M

[progressoid]

107. It is to a lot of Republicans

Including a few on my email list. :evilgrin:

[valerief]

39. It's only news if it's on Fox.

:rofl:

[Rosa Luxemburg]

64. WSJ

[valerief]

69. Ha! Same thing. nt

[peace frog]

54. In other breaking news: the pope appears to be catholic,

bears have been discovered to defecate in the woods, and it is reported that Dolly Parton sleeps on her back!!!

CALL MIKE WALLACE!!! :eyes:

[greiner3]

59. "Dolly Parton sleeps on her back!!!

Can you imagine her with one of those memory foam mattresses? That would allow her to... Never mind. Now I'll have that image in my mind all day. That's neither good nor bad, just, well you get the idea.

[HillbillyBob]

138. There are worse images to think of..

Like McConnell and Boehner in a temper mattress!

but Dolly is much prettier and likely a lot smarter.
Dolly For President, then again she is smart and would not want the job.

Of course I've been a fan of DP since the Porter Wagner show.

[SpiralHawk]

2. "Smirk." - Chickenhawk Republicon FAIL Cronies (R)

[BlueJazz]

3. Most (un greedy) Intelligent people in this country knew the whole thing was a ..

...Con-Job right from the Get-Go.

Unfortunately, the 51+ percent of the populace bought the whole pony-show hook, line. and sinker....
....and dragged our asses right down to the bottom with them. :mad:

[howmad1]

128. Well, when you live in the dumbest country on the planet........

....what do you expect?

[deutsey]

4. As Mr. Tudball might have said to Stockman: "Thank-a-yew fer datta news-a-flash." n/t

[CLANG]

26. Do-a you have-a any ha-news on da Hindenburg?

At about 4:30 in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P2dbwrT_fQ

[deutsey]

93. Ta hur ta hur ta hur!

:hi:

[CLANG]

119. Mr. Tudball is King!!

:toast:

[Oceansaway]

5. K&R...n/t

[theaocp]

6. Watch me bash the GOP

Done. Thanks to the OP. That being said, what in the world would convey left base enthusiasm? Hows about pushing for the bush tax cuts to be rescinded from the get-go and not just waiting for them to expire? Barring that, hows about making sure EVERYONE knows you're going to let them expire and allowing no debate about it whatsoever? Tell the GOP to shove it up their asses and welcome their hatred.

[Enthusiast]

52. I like the way you think.

Let the tax cuts expire no discussion necessary! Welcome their hatred! If they hate Obama any more their heads will explode anyway.

[drm604]

88. The problem is that this would also allow the cuts for the middle and lower classes to expire.

We need to keep those and expire the cuts for people making $200,000 and up ($250,000 for couples). This requires discussion and votes.

If we let them all expire then we'll be putting more of a burden on already suffering people, we'll be doing something anti-stimulus, and we'll be giving the right something to use against us in the next elections.

Keep the cuts for the poor and middle class. Expire the cuts for the upper classes.

[Enthusiast]

90. I agree, of course. nt

[gaiangreentree]

117. expire

Let them ALL expire.
Then Obama can make his own cuts for the middle class.

[drm604]

118. Unfortunately it's not that simple.

The SOB Republicans are going to try to block anything Congress tries to do in regards to this unless it includes extending the tax cuts for the wealthy.

The Democrats need to be very clever in how they handle this. I don't know how, but hopefully someone amongst them has a plan to get around Republican obstructionism.

[gaiangreentree]

141. ?

Why is it not that simple?
The Bushite cuts will expire without any action being taken.
Then the Republicans can argue against making tax cuts all they want.
It is exactly that simple.

[Raksha]

135. +1000

"Tell the GOP to shove it up their asses and welcome their hatred."

It's VERY IMPORTANT at this point not to be the least bit apologetic about it. Clinton talked about "reversing Reaganomics" but it was just that--TALK. NAFTA had exactly the effect Ross Perot said it would, and then some. It's long past time to start actually reversing Reaganomics, without mincing any words about it.

Hopefully, it isn't too late.

[MrScorpio]

7. Eat the rich

I'll bring the BBQ sauce

[AlbertCat]

12. I'll bring the BBQ sauce

and the sour grapes too, apparently.

[texastoast]

105. They taste like Spam

Or so I heard.

[NoSheep]

108. I'll bring the napkins

[Xenotime]

8. All the more reason not to let them in power again.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

9. I'm glad Mr. Stockman is finally realizing this, but he bears much responsibility.

Having read "Sleepwalking Through History" it's clear that he was one of the "architects" (and I hate using that term) of Reaganomics.

[Sherman A1]

16. He knew it then and when he bailed out

in Ronnie's first term (as I recall) he said that trickle down doesn't work.

No one was listening, but I am sure that he said as much.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

20. I have to look that up to get the details. Not surprisingly Mr. Laffer still insists on taking his c

on the road to whomever will listen.

[Sherman A1]

70. I think he did an interview in the Atlantic, but

that was a very, very long time ago and I really don't know if that is correct. I do recall that Stockman said that Reagonomics wouldn't work.

[rampart]

19. stockman's "triumph of politics"

written 20 years ago, explains the entire scheme to loot the citizens. the insiders knew exactly what they were doing.

[Zambero]

27. Didn't he coin the term "Voodoo Economics"?

Too bad nothing ever came from that revelation, other than a trip to the woodshed for someone who dared utter the truth.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

28. It was used by Poppy Bush during the '80 primary. I'm not sure who came up w/ it. Stockman was

one of the people who convinced St. Ronnie of the miracles of supply side economics.

[The Wielding Truth]

29. Amen, Corngood!

[DLine]

10. Too bad those that need to read this, won't

[rox63]

11. They've known what they were doing all along n/t

[FormerDittoHead]

72. Yes. They think of the American worker as a plant that needs pruning and they're the farmers...

Or sheep that need shearing...

But the point is that deep in the heart of EVERY Republican / Conservative is the belief that they're better than other people and that as such, they deserve more (ie: from the inferior people).

The attitude is reflected in the overwhelming vast majority (so your antidotes need not apply) of management that basically think that workers are idiots who need to be told how to do every thing. That's why they have to be paid so much more than the line workers.

As you go higher up in the food chain the attitude worsens, until you get the very rich, who basically believe we the gov't we demand, and if we're not willing to take it from them, we deserve what we get.

[Maineman]

13. I especially appreciate it when a Republican speaks the truth.

Rare though it is, and very late, but still a breath of fresh air. The extent of current Republican lying is quite astonishing to me.

[harun]

22. This is someone from back in the day when they used to have people

in their party that still told the truth. It is lies 24x7 now.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

14. For the 'stating the obvious' files....

...of course it's great to hear it from a Reagan insider nonetheless. Wow.

[apnu]

15. Man that was interesting to read. Thanks! (nt)

[bossy22]

17. some misleading points-

"Stockman says "the second unhappy change in the American economy has been the extraordinary growth of our public debt. In 1970 it was just 40% of gross domestic product, or about $425 billion. When it reaches $18 trillion, it will be 40 times greater than in 1970." Who's to blame? Not big-spending Dems, says Stockman, but "from the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."

This is extremely misleading because it hints to a correlation that is not really there. He uses nominal numbers in absolute terms without looking at the relative. Sure our debt is 40 times higher in nominal terms- but our economy is also 15 times larger now than it was in nominal terms. When you look at relative- until very recently- due to the recession, our debt levels have remained somewhat stable. in the 1970's they were about 40%, then during the 80's increased to about 60%, but in the 90's went down to the mid 40's again. Even through most of the bush administration the debt to gdp ratio never really got over 50%. It wasnt until the recession that it really started to pick up- which is not unexpected (i suggest anyone who wants to know more info about this read krugman's blog at the NY times). We haven't been "living beyond our means".

saying such things is a typical repub mantra these days. they say things like "greece's debt was only $500 billion and ours is $13 trillion so we are in even worse shape". They say this to trick the average american- because they leave out that greece's economy is only 300 billion, but ours is 15 trillion- making our debt to GDP ratio better than theirs.

this article makes good points about the tax cuts but is a typical republican mis-leading peice. What we need is more stimulus aimed at job creation. An economy depressed by lack of spending is not going to be re-invigerated by decreasing spending even more


on edit: being a huge economy gives us a huge line of credit. It's just like personal finances; the wealthier you are the bigger credit you are afforded. incurring debt is not a bad thing; if it is done responsibly. The majority of americans use debt as an important instrument to buy cars, houses, and large capital purchases. For example, if you are buying a house and planning on living in that house for the next 30 years, why do you have to pay for it all at once? Whats wrong with paying it off over a course of 10 years, or 20? There isnt anything bad about it, so why do we complain when the government does it?

[Gormy Cuss]

40. 60% in the 80s (Reagan) mid-40s in the 90s(Clinton) not over 50% (Bush)

Stockman may have been using misleading comparisons but from your post it sounds like the basic premise isn't that far off the mark. Republicans do increase national debt.

As to your last point, incurring debt IS a bad thing if your debt exceeds your ability to repay it under the terms of the loan. Does the government have the means to repay the national debt with current revenue projections?

[bossy22]

49. his basic premise is like saying

a mouse and an elephant are the same becaue they are both animals. Yes its technically true but in reality a useless comparison. Republicans and democrats have both increased debts and decreased debts. Stockman's premise is that the bush tax cuts are hurting us in that matter and he right but then gives wrong reasons to why its hurting us.

Stockman also goes onto to talk about how it was a mistake to go off the gold standard without saying why we went off it (the truth was that our currency was over inflated due to years of war debt from the vietnam war. Nixon needed a way to pay down that debt and stabilize the currency so he was forced to take us off the gold standard. It was either that or have a federal law freezing salaries and prices for 10 years)

to answer your last question, yes, we have the means to repay all our debt with our current revenue projections. republicans withhold this information and thats how they scare us into making these silly social spending cuts in order to "prevent another greece". They will say things like "our debt service will double by 2020" without saying that so will total government spending and tax revenue so the percentages stay the same. Paul krugman (who is a nobel prize winning economist) on his blog http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/ has many articles that explain how our debt service payments aren't going to strangle us. Remember, we incured a debt of almost 200% of GDP during WW2 and survived; and japan today has a debt of 220% of GDP and they haven't had a greek like debt crisis, so what makes people think, the u.s., with better long term growth rates than japan, and an economy 3 times larger, with a debt that is only 80% of GDP is going to have a greek like catastrophe any day? Doesnt make sense right? Right, because its a republican scare tactic against things like job creation bills and more stimulus spending


on edit: the major issue is that he also doesn't relate his data really with any hard economic numbers. Everything in economics, especially the mathematical side, needs to be in relative terms- not nominal. For an example im going to use a person, lets say person A, and tell you some information about him and from that information we will see if we can ascertain his financial condition. Person A has $60,000 dollars in credit card debt. okay, so can we ascertain how is personal finances are. Well at first we may say, "pretty bad" because $60,000 in credit card debt seems like alot but after a second look you can see that we don't know how much he makes or what assets he has; basically we need more information. If person A only makes $30,000 a year, then yes, he is in financial touble; but if person A is bill gates, i think we would say that person is in good financial shape. So you see, we need to take that number and compare it to the whole before we can truly understand the situation. Republicans don't do that, they give you a big number, like a trillion, and hope that people gasp and get horrified at such a big number that they will not stop and critically think about the situation.

[Gormy Cuss]

76. But during the time frame he was referencing, the Republicans increased debt, the Dem did not,

according to your post where relative comparisons were made.
Not arguing that Stockman has made a good case, just that there appears to be some truth in his pile of detritus. Is that correct or did I misunderstand your earlier post?

I agree with you that Stockman should have referenced hard economic numbers. There's no excuse for such sloppy comparisons from someone with his C.V.

[bossy22]

81. there is def. truth to what he says

i'm more critical of his argument as a whole; which is to cut public spending without regard in order to "reduce the debt"

[phasma ex machina]

103. "[Adam] Smith stated that never had any government EVER paid off its debt and that was in 1776."

He was correct. I am assembling all the defaults that are a subject that no one seems to want to talk about.

Yet, there are stark and monumental conclusions that emerge from such a long list of defaults. Society does NOT end as the doomsday crowd portray. This seems to be just their desire or opinion. Many seem to wish disaster upon the world for they feel cheated and did not become rich with the crowd. - "Staring into the abyss"

[JDPriestly]

100. Republicans steal. That is the difference.

They transfer taxes into the pockets of their friends and some of it transfers back to them.

The DLCers like that game too. Clinton was not a rich man when he became president. He signed lots of bills that the wealthy liked. They thanked him generously. He lives the lifestyle of a multimillionaire -- which is what he is.

I remember when, during the dark Lewinsky days, we were all wondering whether Clinton would have to go into bankruptcy due to his legal fees. I remember that there was a call for donations to help the poor Clintons pay their legal fees.

So, let's remember that the DLCers and the Republicans play the same dirty game.

Every once in a while, at school, there would be some kid who just didn't understand why he shouldn't just take what he wanted without asking. Well now you know where those kids went --

[Murray_R]

130. Really?

"They transfer taxes into the pockets of their friends and some of it transfers back to them."

Is that like when the Democrats take tax dollars and give it to the UAW via 'seizing' bankrupt GM and ignoring existing secured creditor laws so they can screw the pension funds and other investors that held GM stock?

Or is it like doing an end-around on State balanced budget laws so that Democrats can take tax dollars and give them to teachers unions, a portion of which certainly makes its way back into Democratic campaign coffers?

The taxes that are 'stealing' are the taxes that are taken from person A, not to defend his property, rights and person, but instead to give to person B for having more political clout. That stuff happens across the spectrum. The notion that we can utilize the government's power to seize productive people's wealth in order that some may live at the expense of others is behind most government spending at the federal level. Way too many people expect to live at the expense of others, and the government provides a legal means to achieve this.

[JDPriestly]

132. Pension funds are deferred wages.

That is why the UAW pension funds were given the money. The people earned their pensions. Unfortunately, ERISA law permits a lot of employers to renege on pension funds that contain deferred wages. That is what is wrong. UAW members have taken not just cuts in pay but also cuts in those deferred wages -- in terms of lower benefits for those on pensions.

I have never heard of money being given to the teachers' unions. Money is paid to teachers for their salaries. I haven't heard that teachers have had the kinds of raises that have been given to the folks in the big Wall Street vulture companies.

You've got your facts wrong. Teachers work for every cent they get paid as do and did the UAW rank and file. The leaches in banking and Wall Street are what are doing this country in, not the UAW workers or the teachers.

My mother was born before women had the right to vote and remains sharp as a tack to this day. (She never drank, smoke or ate a lot of fat and has stayed pretty healthy into her nineties.) She will tell you that when the rich get too large a portion of the wealth, the economy goes bust. Happens every time. You can check the numbers and charts yourself.

[heliarc]

41. Bingo

This piece, knowingly or unwittingly serves largely to undermine the new stimulus package. Good point.

[bossy22]

51. exactly

[Enthusiast]

53. Nice post! nt

[NewJeffCT]

85. Great points, but

the ratio under Bush was climbing steadily, as there were a lot of "off budget" items that weren't counted until Obama took office - The Iraq War was almost all funded by supplemental "off budget" emergency funding.

Even with some of the spending and bailouts from the last two years, we're still only around #20 in terms of worst Debt-to-GDP ratios, better than most of western Europe and Japan.

[apnu]

18. Here is a link to the NYT OpEd by Stockman

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinion/01stockman.html

[Yavin4]

21. Someone Doesn't Want To Spend Eternity in Hell with Dick Cheney

That's right Republicans. That's the fate that awaits you. Eternal Hell with Dick.

[Zambero]

25. Mea Maxima Culpa

Father forgive them, uh, I mean US, for we now know what we do. Although it's way too late to UN-do. Yes, purgatory please.

[valerief]

44. Face-shooter Dick. Yecch! nt

[Enthusiast]

57. And Limbaugh.

Bwahahahaha.

[midnight]

23. "Deficits don't matter if the result from tax cuts"

Got us into this mess? And the trigger that will make this more painfully obvious is going to kick in. Oops....

[mwb970]

24. "A war against greed and the wealthy".

Lock and load, folks.

[DailyGrind51]

30. I sent this to a conservative among my "contacts", just to piss him off!

Thanks!

[apnu]

42. I did the same to a few I know.

Most of them, however, loath the GOP's policies as Stockman does with the same level of dislike they harbor towards Democrats. In reality, they agree with Stockman, particularly on the removal of the gold standard. But they know people who are GOP to the core and, my hope is, they'll talk to these blind fools and get them to quit worshiping at St. Ronnie of the Ray-Gun's alter.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. I predicted that 30 years ago

What took him so long?

[barb162]

38. A few months or years after he left the Reagan administration, he said

supply side economics didn't work. But the damage was already done as the Republicans kept using it anyway, even to date.

[FlyByNight]

32. The GOP doesn't care about the economy

They care ONLY for money/power: how to acquire it, how to wield it, how to keep it. Nothing else enters into their political equation.

If/when Friedmanite policies implode the economy, it simply means nothing to the Rs. They don't care. They just don't care.

:grr:

[valerief]

46. +69 trillion

[snagglepuss]

34. The question is when will run of the mill repukes realize that foxes were in

put in charge of the hen house when Reagan got elected?

[TBF]

106. That seems to happen in every administration... nt

[raouldukelives]

35. Sometimes I feel like that "Drowing govt. in a bathtub."

quote by Norquist is exactly what they want. If it is then it's been a rousing success so far. I just hope they include some Mr. Bubble for the kids.

[valerief]

47. Nothing for the kids. Nothing for nobody but the elite. nt

[OnionPatch]

75. Or course that's exactly what they wanted.

Look around at our governments, state and local.....cutting services, selling our parks and commons, firing govt. employees, shutting down schools......I hope everyone realizes it's exactly what the GOP PTB want. They want us to be merely serfs while they rake in the benefits of our labor and suck up our country's resources for their own. It's the same old story that's been going on throughout history. They see us as peasants who got too uppity. Imagine the nerve of us wanting a decent lifestyle for the working/middle classes. This was their plan to end it all, put us back in our places, it started with Reagan and you're right, it's working.

[barb162]

37. Mr. Supply Side Economics at least has gotten it straight the last few years

At least he is speaking out about the crap he started under Reagan. Once he started speaking out how his own economic ideology didn't work, the GOP still pushes the crap anyway for the last few decades.

[amyrose2712]

43. Yea, no doy! nt

[dadzilla]

45. Just one problem...

Republicans don't care. Why do something difficult when you can float some jingo about freedom, scape goat the ethnic minority of the week, wave a flag and be at the clubhouse by 5:30 and the suckers will still vote for you.

[Enthusiast]

58. You forgot "bow their heads in prayer"

:fistbump:

[grahamhgreen]

50. Hopefully, he will be listened to by some of the GOP.

[Ganja Ninja]

61. Don't hold your breath waiting for that.

They are thoroughly invested in the big lie called the Reagan legacy. For them to admit they've been wrong and caused all our economic problems would take something they don't have, real patriotism.

[sofa king]

55. I'm pretty sure raising taxes on the wealthy by 12% would pay off the debt in less than 10 years.

They squeaked out of it the last time with the Bush tax cuts, which is why we're $18 trillion in the hole now instead of at zero, which was the trajectory left for President Bush by President Clinton.

Seeing as how the past ten years have sucked for virtually all of us except the wealthiest Americans, why shouldn't we do this? They skipped out on having family and friends die in Bush's wars, as we did; they skipped out on having to lose government services in order to pay for those wars, as we did; they profited from the results of the two-or-more Bush recessions, while we suffered; they deftly stepped aside from the disasters we endured. They were the architects of all that suffering, and as such, they avoided almost all of it.

So why can't we take every goddamned red cent they siphon away from us and put it into the debt from which they alone profited? Would America be any worse off if they were all to leave for the Caymans with their ill-gotten gains? NO! Then it's time to treat them as the burdens on our society that they are and make them pay for it, both what they owe us each and every day, and what they owe us for the free ride they've enjoyed for the past ten years.

[florida08]

56. his oped isn't about what WE already know

it's about what republican voters don't or refuse to accept. Still clinging to the false hope that if they just keep doing what they've always done it will work. Well it doesn't and someone needed to say it from that party.

It's about how ridiculous the policies of the GOP have become. Fiscal responsibility be damned if it will win elections. Using racism and prejudice to divide the country. Showing no remorse for what they've done but shouting loudly it must continue.

Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts — in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses, too. But the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance...

This approach has not simply made a mockery of traditional party ideals. It has also led to the serial financial bubbles and Wall Street depredations that have crippled our economy. More specifically, the new policy doctrines have caused four great deformations of the national economy, and modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one..

Through the 1984 election, the old guard earnestly tried to control the deficit, rolling back about 40 percent of the original Reagan tax cuts but when, in the following years, the Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, finally crushed inflation, enabling a solid economic rebound, the new tax-cutters not only claimed victory for their supply-side strategy but hooked Republicans for good on the delusion that the economy will outgrow the deficit if plied with enough tax cuts.

It really is a good piece and thanks to the poster on this thread that posted the original link. He should be on shows across the board but maybe Keith or Rachel will pick it up. Republican voters need to face reality and I know no other way than for one of their own to tell them loud and clear that what they've believed all these years is a lie. Might or might not go anywhere but it needed to be said. Maybe a few more will come out and expose it. Maybe some moderates will get it. But I'm damn glad he did.

[KamaAina]

60. Reminds me of some classic Mark Russell, to the tune of "Davey Crockett"

"We know it's a Trojan horse, but why did you tell them?
Davey, Davey Stockman, why did you tell them?"

[Rosa Luxemburg]

62. Holy Smoke batman!

nice coming from the WSJ

[liberal N proud]

63. And they will continue the destruction if they regain power.

This goes all the way back to Nixon.

[City Lights]

65. K&R. nt

[Uncle Joe]

66. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread. BigD.

[davidwparker]

67. Do tell

All that money spent on weapons to do battle with the Soviet Union, but it took one Any Rand and devotees to bring us down.

[davepc]

68. This guy has been bashing Regan for years. Nobody listened to him in the late 1980s

Nobody is going to listen to him now.

[BrklynLiberal]

71. ooops. Better watch your back Mr. Stockman. No small planes or isolated motels..

[davepc]

77. He hasent died yet...

http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-Politics-Reagan-Revolution-Failed/dp/0380703114



That came out in 1986.

[wryter2000]

80. I got that used

Interesting book. Unfortunately, he's not always easy to understand for the layperson.

One thing that did strike me in the book was he says his original purpose when he signed on with the Rayguy team was to recreate "the great fortunes of the 19th Century" -- in other words, exactly the people Teddy Roosevelt went after. I'd say Stockman succeeded at that very well, much to the detriment of the rest of us.

[NewJeffCT]

86. There has been a large group of Republicans/conservatives

like Stockman & Alan Greenspan, that have called for the Bush tax cuts to expire... unfortunately, they seem to get almost no publicity.

[Yavin4]

73. All of those Former Reagan Economists Are Finding Religion

Stockman, Krugman, and Greenspan.

[valerief]

84. Maybe they don't want to be the first targets of the militias. nt

[alfredo]

74. Stockman's editorial. Copy and pass around to everyone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinion/01stockman.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=david%20stockman&st=cse

[sakabatou]

79. No, really?!

[rucky]

82. The headline may be obvious, but read the whole article.

It's pretty darn comprehensive.

[SpankMe]

83. Yeah, I know he's promoting his book...

...but I'll still take whatever I can get! Any time a Republican exposes the fraud of the Republicans' way of doing business with such strong facts and analysis, we should rejoice.

[truedelphi]

89. + 1. n/t

[ooglymoogly]

96. Exactly; Pile on is required here, not derision.

Sure we all new it...but the pugs will not admit the tragically comic farce of trying still, to pretend they didn't fall on the economy like a million sucking leaches.

Admissions of willful theft, covered by ignorant farcical platitudes; From deep inside the pug mafia of corporate power; Can only help us get the message through the thick skulls of the deafest and dumbest and blindest; Who are avoiding the burning truth that would damn them to hell;

A fragile bubble that is strenuously being held together by the jawboning cuds of the ridiculous lies of Fuxus News, Glen Bleck and Trash Slimeballs.

So yes; This is always good news; News we can be grateful for in the dangerous times we live in.

[KansDem]

91. So what do we do now?

:shrug:

[judesedit]

94. I blame ALL of Congress for not stopping this 9 years ago and not impeaching Bushco....

as soon as they proved incompetent. That is why 90% of the bastards should be voted OUT of office!

[Turborama]

95. 4589 views so far. Everyone who views this for the 1st time should rec it instinctively!!

Or, if they went away and forgot to rec, should make sure they rec the next time they visit. JMHO.

& Email it, Reddit it, Digg it, Facebook it, Twitter it etc etc etc...

This shit needs to go viral!

Thanks a lot for posting.

[Xicano]

97. "Wrong: There are far bigger things to 'pity.' "

First, that most Americans, 300 million, are helpless, will do nothing, sit in the bleachers passively watching this deadly partisan game like it's just another TV reality show.

Second, that, unfortunately, politicians are so deep-in-the-pockets of the Wall Street conspiracy that controls Washington they are helpless and blind.

And third, there's a depressing sense that Stockman will be dismissed as a traitor, his message lost in the 24/7 news cycle ... until the final apocalyptic event, an unpredictable black swan triggers another, bigger global meltdown, followed by a long Great Depression II and a historic class war.

[JDPriestly]

98. A comment about Nixon's irresponsibility.

Stage 1. Nixon irresponsible, dumps gold, U.S starts spending binge

Richard Nixon's gold policies get Stockman's first assault, for defaulting "on American obligations under the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement to balance our accounts with the world." So for the past 40 years, America's been living "beyond our means as a nation" on "borrowed prosperity on an epic scale ... an outcome that Milton Friedman said could never happen when, in 1971, he persuaded President Nixon to unleash on the world paper dollars no longer redeemable in gold or other fixed monetary reserves."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-2010-08-10?pagenumber=1

Yes. Nixon was irresponsible. But I must say, so was Lyndon Johnson. You cannot fight wars -- as Johnson and Nixon did after him without sacrifice.

Johnson and Nixon wasted our treasure on the War in Viet Nam. Our default in 1971 was just the necessary result of that War.

And then came 1973 and the oil crises. The world was buying increasing amounts of oil from the Middle East with American dollars. And those dollars were losing value very quickly. The nations of the Middle East with Sheik Yamani of Saudi Arabia in the forefront staged a financial revolution. And it was under that pressure -- the loss of value of the dollar and the vanity of refusing to admit defeat in Viet Nam that forced Nixon to abandon gold.

So there you have it -- war, and the need to win at all cost, to be right at all cost, is what does us in, is what did us in as a nation. Pride -- wanting to save face -- the very sin that we accused the Viet Kong we were fighting of having -- is what ultimately was the source of our own economic downfall.

We can pick ourselves up but only if we learn to have a little humility. We need to stop talking about how rich and successful we are and put ourselves back to work. In this economy, the individual cannot go it alone. The rich will soon find that out. We poor already have.

And, and while we are at it, we need to stop fighting so many wars. When will we ever realize that wars do not pay?

[pitohui]

114. seems to deliberately ignore clinton's achievement

i'm puzzled why he goes back 40 years to nixon, and ignores the fact that clinton balanced the budget just fine and even handed over a surplus

johnson and nixon were in a more liberal era, when there was an expansion of programs, war on poverty, etc, i don't think dumping gold was a bad or wrong thing to do, nixon got lots of stuff wrong but not that

nixon and reagan had v. diff. beliefs, sure, they were both bad, but reagan was so far out in the wingnutty arena of bad that it's almost hard to fathom all these years later -- it was known even then that reagan's ideas were crazy "voodoo economics" but the GOP was courting the racists and you can always get a racist to vote aga. his economic interest by playing the race card

wars may or may not pay, ww2 certainly paid nice dividends, at the time i'm sure many thought vietnam created jobs in defense, i don't agree but it was jobs for some people and $ for some contractors, just as iraq is...we don't effectively argue against war by saying "wars do not pay" because war pays a certain elite class of people much better than they could ever earn otherwise

but "trickle down" is just idiotic, if you want to create jobs, create jobs, don't give $ to fucking zillionaires -- fdr didn't hand out $ to his cronies, he had jobs programs, in my humble opinion that's the way to go rather than worrying abt deficits

ok, i'm rambling now, just a few thoughts

at the end of the day, yes, reagan was a thief, but he should have said so LOUDLY at the time, it does no good and shows no courage to say so now

tell the pope "it still moves" in 1600 not in 2000 if you want credit for gonads

[Murray_R]

129. which year was the Clinton surplus?

Federal debt to the penny:
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25

[lakers4life24]

99. GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible

GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible
GOP= Liars GOP supporters= Gullible

Nuff Said

[jonthebru]

101. I have been watching this happen for years...

as many of us have. I will never forget Big Dick Cheney saying in an interview, 60 minutes I think, that deficits are good. Huh? I am no economist, but I do have a mortgage and credit cards, deficits are not good. Yet the sheep of our citizens (sheeple) followed right along, docile consumers only intent on what they have been conditioned to desire...
Your dreams are bought and sold... Say, you want a revolution?

[laughingliberal]

112. The quote was: "Reagan taught us that deficits don't matter." nt

[spicegal]

104. Wish more right wingers would read this article.

However, even when faced with facts or opinions from Reaganites, or fellow Republicans, they ignore it.

[Liberalynn]

109. Ronald Wilson Reagan

666

[Initech]

110. The GOP: helping old white guys get rich since 1865!

[rurallib]

111. This will be the LTTE that I write tomorrow

with a tie in for Senate Finance Chair/ ranking member Chuck Grassley!

[laughingliberal]

113. So, can we ditch Reaganomics, now? nt

[luckyleftyme2]

116. lets all re-read the comments

take the time to re-read the comments-see how many repukes are posting in here

of course Reagonomics sucked-who was Reagan's vice president? hmmm what did he do -what was his expertise in the cia? seem to recall sumthin bout mis-information was one of his specialties! where did he come from? chase this lead
down then find out if he was in oil! hmmm sumthin tells me he was! so was his son!
think like they do-they left a trail a blind man could follow!
would make a helluva book!

[madmax]

115. Emailing to everyone in my address book. nt

[Yeahyeah]

120. So what! I say we still name everything after Dutch!

[sam sarrha]

122. This >Link>> explains the wealth "Redistribution" in America. bottom 80% has 7% of Financial wealth

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

"snip...
Financial Wealth
-----Top 1% Next 19%... Bottom 80%

2007- 42.7%.... 50.3%.... .....7.0% ...snip"

THE PRECEDING GRAPH is the definition of FACISM..

you cant have an economy in a Plutocratic Plutocracy.. there is nothing left to spend/develop/expand non corporate business

[unkachuck]

124. Stockman, a very rare breed....an honest Republican....n/t

[Historic NY]

125. send it to the teabaggers....that warm feeling in the Reagan area...

was the GOP pissing on people aka the trickle down effect.

[Historic NY]

126. If Obama maintains the "status quo" why should the Pukes complain..

in this case the status quo is letting the tax cuts go, by just saying no.

[scentopine]

127. Obama's Deep Admiration of Reagan

It goes a long way toward understanding why he governs the way he does and why he and his administration express disdain for "those on the left" while working in earnest to befriend loyal republican supporters.

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3263

There are many reason progressives should admire Ronald Reagan, politically speaking. He realigned the country around his vision, he brought into power a new movement that created conservative change, and he was an extremely skilled politician. But that is not why Obama admires Reagan. Obama admires Reagan because he agrees with Reagan's basic frame that the 1960s and 1970s were full of 'excesses' and that government had grown large and unaccountable.

Those excesses, of course, were feminism, the consumer rights movement, the civil rights movement, the environmental movement, and the antiwar movement. The libertarian anti-government ideology of an unaccountable large liberal government was designed by ideological conservatives to take advantage of the backlash against these 'excesses'.

It is extremely disturbing to hear, not that Obama admires Reagan, but why he does so. Reagan was not a sunny optimist pushing dynamic entrepreneurship, but a savvy politician using a civil rights backlash to catapult conservatives to power. Lots of people don't agree with this, of course, since it doesn't fit a coherent narrative of GOP ascendancy. Masking Reagan's true political underpinning principles is a central goal of the conservative movement, with someone as powerful as Grover Norquist seeking to put Reagan's name on as many monuments as possible and the Republican candidates themselves using Reagan's name instead of George Bush's in GOP debates as a mark of greatness. Why would the conservative movement create such idolatry around Reagan? Is is because they just want to honor a great man? Perhaps that is some of it. Or are they trying to escape the legacy of the conservative movement so that it can be rebuilt in a few years, as they did after Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I?

I don't know. But if you think, as Obama does, that Reagan's rise to power was premised on a sunny optimism in contrast to an out of control government and a society rife with liberal excess, then you don't understand the conservative movement. Reagan tapped into greed and fear and tribalism, and those are powerful forces. Ignoring that isn't going to make them go away.

Video here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFLuOBsNMZA

[Yeahyeah]

136. Hey,Obama's an intellectual.He hangs out with Oprah.

[Oldtimeralso]

131. This is a nominee for the NSS Award for this week

NSS = No Shit Sherlock

[Manix]

133. ...cue up the wingnut feigned outrage on Fox

..heretics will not be tolerated.

[Judi Lynn]

137. Kicked, recommended. Highest # of recs. I've ever seen! Thanks for this info.

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[felix_numinous]

139. Well then this group of people transcended party politics

and slipped right into treason.

[craigmatic]

140. Reaganism ruined the economy. Repub financial policy didn't used to be that bad until reagan

Used to be the repubs would talk about balanced budgets and less federal spending. That actually made more sense than what they've done recently. Reagan came along and decided to "starve" the federal government of funding by cutting taxes. It didn't work then because he had to reverse himself the next year. All the cut taxes did was create an investment bubble that popped by the late 80's. The first bush had to raise taxes to fix the economy. Deficits soared and didn't come down until Clinton.