50 Years since the Time of Choosing

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

"Less regulation on businesses!"
Ooh, another good one.
Let's give businesses more freedom to abuse workers and create products that kill us.
How about we let them discriminate based on race, sexuality, etc. too?
I'm sure the Libertarians would like that one.

Uh, no we wouldn't like it, but why are you ranting about libertarians on a thread about conservatives? You do realize they are directly opposed to one another? The former supports social liberalism, free markets and minimal statism/anarchism, the other is an authoritarian, traditionalist, nationalist, corporatocratic bullshit excuse of an "ideology".

I like Reagan. I don't think he was a typical conservative at all. Unfortunately he was a drug warrior, but still strengthened black civil rights and liberalised immigration restrictions. He was not perfect, but his pro-market policies inspired an economic revolution across the world that created enormous amounts of prosperity and wealth for billions of people and led people to question the state as a force of good. His reforms led to two decades of peace and rising prosperity in the United States and abroad. But it was, ironically, traditional neo-conservatism in the Bush Administration that killed the Reagan Revolution and re-winded advances in economic freedom.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Company-provided healthcare, cars, education or training, etc. Things like these may sound frivolous to you or I, but they account for 20% of average total compensation. Money wages and non-monetary compensation have continued to increase, which explains the dramatic advances in personal and household incomes in the last three decades.

Compensation stagnation has only begun to occur in the last five years, and the worker productivity gap has only appeared since 2001-2. I'd guess this has something to do with the Greenspan monetary expansion, but I'm just speculating.

Could this be accounted for by healthcare and education cost increases?

Perhaps. Although increases in the cost of these things have, surprisingly, been slowing down since 2000.

[Republic of Coldwater]

Uh, no we wouldn't like it, but why are you ranting about libertarians on a thread about conservatives? You do realize they are directly opposed to one another? The former supports social liberalism, free markets and minimal statism/anarchism, the other is an authoritarian, traditionalist, nationalist, corporatocratic bullshit excuse of an "ideology".

I like Reagan. I don't think he was a typical conservative at all. Unfortunately he was a drug warrior, but still strengthened black civil rights and liberalised immigration restrictions. He was not perfect, but his pro-market policies inspired an economic revolution across the world that created enormous amounts of prosperity and wealth for billions of people and led people to question the state as a force of good. His reforms led to two decades of peace and rising prosperity in the United States and abroad. But it was, ironically, traditional neo-conservatism in the Bush Administration that killed the Reagan Revolution and re-winded advances in economic freedom.

I like his policies on the economy, but he should've balanced a budget when he had Democrats and Republicans in Congress who would've easily supported his policies.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

"Less regulation on businesses!"
Ooh, another good one.
Let's give businesses more freedom to abuse workers and create products that kill us.
How about we let them discriminate based on race, sexuality, etc. too?
I'm sure the Libertarians would like that one.

Dumb straw man argument. 2/10

Regulations don't restrict "freedom" to do bad things. If anything, they're the greatest enabler of corporate crime. Where was the regulatory state during the BP oil spill? The Coca-Cola death squads? The housing market collapse? It was ever-present, and provided a soft, comfy cushion for the corporate bosses to land on after they were done screwing us over - while smaller, unfavoured businesses burned in the flames of market competition.

Regulation, historically and today, has been a tool of the largest companies to destroy competition and take control of markets under the guise of "protecting the public". It is anti-workers' rights, and prevents individuals from choosing how, where, and what to work for. The regulatory state is a force of corporatism, corruption, evil and impoverishment that has made each and every one of us poorer. The sooner the grassroots left realises this, the better. Deregulation should be a social democratic as well as a liberal economic policy if they care about helping poor people.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

I like Reagan. I don't think he was a typical conservative at all. Unfortunately he was a drug warrior, but still strengthened black civil rights and liberalised immigration restrictions. He was not perfect, but his pro-market policies inspired an economic revolution across the world that created enormous amounts of prosperity and wealth for billions of people and led people to question the state as a force of good. His reforms led to two decades of peace and rising prosperity in the United States and abroad. But it was, ironically, traditional neo-conservatism in the Bush Administration that killed the Reagan Revolution and re-winded advances in economic freedom.

I like his policies on the economy, but he should've balanced a budget when he had Democrats and Republicans in Congress who would've easily supported his policies.

I agree that he didn't push hard enough. But he still tried. A balanced budget constitutional amendment that his administration and party pushed actually passed both chambers of Congress with majorities - 68 in the Senate and 56 in the House. But a two-thirds supermajority was required in the House, so it failed by 10 votes. He pushed and outlined numerous cuts to programs that would have balanced the budget. Elimination of multiple departments, cuts to Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security, privatisation of the TVA and federal lands would have all brought lower spending and higher revenues. All were submitted to Congress, and most failed.

There was a significant conservative-leaning faction in the Democratic Party - the "Blue Dogs" or "Bole Weevils" - which strongly supported Reagan's tax cut and deregulation agenda, but few were politically brave enough to cut spending. Perhaps if a wholly Republican Congress were elected, history would be different.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Then came Nixon, the moderate,

Moderate? He was a full-on anti-gold, anti-gun, pro-regulation, pro-state healthcare, pro-welfare Keynesian.

Reagan did a lot to end the cold war, in my opinion, but economically he sucked. He raised taxes, which isn't a neocon way of doing things at all.

On net, he cut taxes. I've calculated that cumulative tax increases under the Reagan Administration amounted to a 1.16% increase in taxes on income. This came through raised payroll taxes for Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance. But the tax cuts far outweighed the tax increases.

Obama is socially one of the most liberal presidents we've had.

No he's not. He's an ardent opponent of civil liberties and is only a token supporter of equal marriage rights.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Carter tried to deregulate, whot?

Well, he did try to cut taxes. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=31055 It sounds just like Reagan's strategy, but at least Carter didn't act like he had done something clever or novel.

He cut the corporate rate, but was adamantly opposed to cutting income taxes or indexing them for inflation. This is one of the more infamous reasons he lost the '80 election.

[Svatantra Mulukama]

Then came Nixon, the moderate,

Moderate? He was a full-on anti-gold, anti-gun, pro-regulation, pro-state healthcare, pro-welfare Keynesian.

Reagan did a lot to end the cold war, in my opinion, but economically he sucked. He raised taxes, which isn't a neocon way of doing things at all.

On net, he cut taxes. I've calculated that cumulative tax increases under the Reagan Administration amounted to a 1.16% increase in taxes on income. This came through raised payroll taxes for Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance. But the tax cuts far outweighed the tax increases.

Obama is socially one of the most liberal presidents we've had.

No he's not. He's an ardent opponent of civil liberties and is only a token supporter of equal marriage rights.

Yes, Nixon was a anti gold, anti gun, pro regulation, pro welfare Keynesian. That doesn't mean he wasn't "moderate." Although, I'll agree with you when you that Obama is an opponent of quite a few civil liberties.

[Othelos]

Could this be accounted for by healthcare and education cost increases?

Perhaps. Although increases in the cost of these things have, surprisingly, been slowing down since 2000.

that graph shows that the increase in college tuition prices has been speeding up.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Reagan raised Social Security Taxes but cut income and corporate taxes (which actually increased revenue). I do not agree with Reagan's spending policy as he spent more instead of keeping spending flat to create a balanced budget and thus not making us go into this mess.

He had a pretty good record on domestic spending.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Moderate? He was a full-on anti-gold, anti-gun, pro-regulation, pro-state healthcare, pro-welfare Keynesian.


On net, he cut taxes. I've calculated that cumulative tax increases under the Reagan Administration amounted to a 1.16% increase in taxes on income. This came through raised payroll taxes for Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance. But the tax cuts far outweighed the tax increases.


No he's not. He's an ardent opponent of civil liberties and is only a token supporter of equal marriage rights.

Yes, Nixon was a anti gold, anti gun, pro regulation, pro welfare Keynesian. That doesn't mean he wasn't "moderate." Although, I'll agree with you when you that Obama is an opponent of quite a few civil liberties.

I think calling him a moderate would be an understatement. I agree with Noam Chomsky that he was America's last social democratic president.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Perhaps. Although increases in the cost of these things have, surprisingly, been slowing down since 2000.

that graph shows that the increase in college tuition prices has been speeding up.

I ran it through the percentage calculator, and it said that tuition fees increased by 70% 2000-2009, which is significantly better than 76% in the 90s and 106% in the 80s.

[Kelinfort]

Could this be accounted for by healthcare and education cost increases?

Perhaps. Although increases in the cost of these things have, surprisingly, been slowing down since 2000.

The point is, despite wages increasing in the eighties, actual monetary compensation fell.
Coupled with an explosion in the cost of healthcare, what were the actual benefits of these purported higher wages? The data just seems a little out of place.

[Svatantra Mulukama]

Yes, Nixon was a anti gold, anti gun, pro regulation, pro welfare Keynesian. That doesn't mean he wasn't "moderate." Although, I'll agree with you when you that Obama is an opponent of quite a few civil liberties.

I think calling him a moderate would be an understatement. I agree with Noam Chomsky that he was America's last social democratic president.

I fail to see how he was a social democrat.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

I think calling him a moderate would be an understatement. I agree with Noam Chomsky that he was America's last social democratic president.

I fail to see how he was a social democrat.

I do not like using the word "liberal" to describe mainstream American leftists.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

From the above, it's reasonable to reach the conclusion that Jimmy Carter was one of the worst presidents in American history since Andrew Johnson, another Democrat.

Andrew Johnson's idea of restoring the Antebellum American South wasn't bad, but he was a terrible person to blacks and didn't fight the Radical Republicans hard enough (The Radical Republicans wanted to destroy and punish a lot of the American South for simply practicing secession.

No, the Radicals had the right idea... 3 acres and a mule for every Freedman would have given blacks back what was stolen from them and probably would have resulted in racial harmony ad blacks could be integrated in society as property owners.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Perhaps. Although increases in the cost of these things have, surprisingly, been slowing down since 2000.

The point is, despite wages increasing in the eighties, actual monetary compensation fell.
Coupled with an explosion in the cost of healthcare, what were the actual benefits of these purported higher wages? The data just seems a little out of place.

Total compensation rose during the 80s. I haven't examined the data on money wages in enough detail, but whether or not they fell, it doesn't matter. Taking a company car instead of a 2% raise still increases your income, because you have more left over that you would've spent on a car.

[Geilinor]

Yes, Nixon was a anti gold, anti gun, pro regulation, pro welfare Keynesian. That doesn't mean he wasn't "moderate." Although, I'll agree with you when you that Obama is an opponent of quite a few civil liberties.

I think calling him a moderate would be an understatement. I agree with Noam Chomsky that he was America's last social democratic president.

Nixon wasn't a "social democrat" at all. There hasn't been a Republican social democratic president since Theodore Roosevelt.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

I think calling him a moderate would be an understatement. I agree with Noam Chomsky that he was America's last social democratic president.

Nixon wasn't a "social democrat" at all. There hasn't been a Republican social democratic president since Theodore Roosevelt.

Then please, give me another way of saying "American liberal" that's more accurate and actually fitting to their ideology.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Interesting, I recall him having generally Keynesian economics and implementing such policies. (And not drastically cutting taxes and regulation like Reagan, who actually improved the economy)

You don't recall. You were told. You were told wrong. Next time you want to try to claim an opinion on this stuff, try to learn.

Economy didn't improve under Reagan, FYI. Poverty rose to its highest rate in decades and real wages fell throughout his entire presidency.

Actually, it fell from 15.3% in 1983 to under 13% in 1989. As I've tirelessly demonstrated, real compensation rose by 11%.

[Kelinfort]

The point is, despite wages increasing in the eighties, actual monetary compensation fell.
Coupled with an explosion in the cost of healthcare, what were the actual benefits of these purported higher wages? The data just seems a little out of place.

Total compensation rose during the 80s. I haven't examined the data on money wages in enough detail, but whether or not they fell, it doesn't matter. Taking a company car instead of a 2% raise still increases your income, because you have more left over that you would've spent on a car.

It's more common in terms of healthcare and I see where you're coming from, but couldn't this just be a function of increased cost and not actual economic benefit? Most businesses do not actually provide education or another form of subsidy, but healthcare usually accompanies employment.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

Reagan had a number of good points; "accommadation" in geopolitical dealings with groups and countries hostile to your actions and interests, is, and forever will be appeasement. However, I have a tendancy to disagree with a number of Reagan's Social Policies.

I'm more of an Eisenhower kind of guy. I like building shit here at home (be it the glorious freaking Aerospace-Defense Industry he created or the highways), with a great foreign policy (I finished reading his papers from the Taiwan Strait Crisis, and the man knew what he was doing).

Engineering pro-Western coups around the world that erected brutal dictatorships and caused severe blow-back later on doesn't exactly reek of foreign policy success. Vietnam was also not a victory.

[Svatantra Mulukama]

I fail to see how he was a social democrat.

I do not like using the word "liberal" to describe mainstream American leftists.

Irrelevant, since Nixon was far from a leftist. He condemned all forms of leftism often.

[Atlanticatia]

I like Reagan. I don't think he was a typical conservative at all. Unfortunately he was a drug warrior, but still strengthened black civil rights and liberalised immigration restrictions.

How did he strengthen civil rights for black people?

- He vetoed the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987.
- He vetoed anti-apartheid sanctions against South Africa.
- He opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, calling it "humiliating to the South".
- He opposed the Civil Rights Act.
- While he was campaigning in Georgia, he called Confederate President Jefferson Davis (you know, President of that country that seceded to protect slaver -- I mean, the 'Southern' way of life) one of his personal heroes.
- He supported continuing tax breaks for Bob Jones University, a segregated university that banned dating between blacks and whites
- He opposed instituting Martin Luther King Day at first, however he later signed it when there was a veto-proof majority.

Those are facts, however, in my opinion he also used racial politics to gain the white conservative vote, continuing the Southern strategy and pandering to racism, and promoted a lot of his policies by putting images out to the public of the hardworking white taxpayer and the lazy black welfare queen.

[Lerodan Chinamerica]

I like Reagan. I don't think he was a typical conservative at all. Unfortunately he was a drug warrior, but still strengthened black civil rights and liberalised immigration restrictions.

How did he strengthen civil rights for black people?

- He vetoed the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987.
- He vetoed anti-apartheid sanctions against South Africa.
- He opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, calling it "humiliating to the South".
- He opposed the Civil Rights Act.
- While he was campaigning in Georgia, he called Confederate President Jefferson Davis (you know, President of that country that seceded to protect slaver -- I mean, the 'Southern' way of life) one of his personal heroes.
- He supported continuing tax breaks for Bob Jones University, a segregated university that banned dating between blacks and whites
- He opposed instituting Martin Luther King Day at first, however he later signed it when there was a veto-proof majority.

Those are facts, however, in my opinion he also used racial politics to gain the white conservative vote, continuing the Southern strategy and pandering to racism, and promoted a lot of his policies by putting images out to the public of the hardworking white taxpayer and the lazy black welfare queen.

You're right. Indeed, his record is mixed. But aside from the Southern-pandering rhetoric during the 80 campaign, it is difficult to construe him as a racist during his Presidency. He believed that the Civil Rights Restoration Act imposed an unjust regulatory burden on the business community. In fact, they joined him in opposing the act - including numerous black businessmen. If you think this is just an excuse, if you read his veto message you can see that he had actually proposed an alternative bill - the Civil Rights Protection Act - which he viewed as containing stronger civil rights protections while ensuring a lighter regulatory burden. His veto of apartheid sanctions can be viewed in the context of the Cold War as a strategic move. South Africa was a strong ally of the United States against Angola, Zimbabwe and other socialist regimes on the continent. But we can still tell from private and public statements that he hated apartheid, but believed that if the US supported Mandela, it would be replaced by an even more brutal Communist regime. I believe Thatcher took a similar view. On his initial opposition to MLK Jr. Day, he cited cost concerns for this. And the "welfare queen" was very much a real person.

His Administration pledged to renew the Voting Rights Act, and did so. He established the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities to increase African-American participation in federal education programs, the African-American Equal Employment Commission (not to be confused with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) and as Governor of California worked to desegregate the state government. And as I've said before, his economic policies had very positive effects on African-Americans. He froze the minimum wage at $3.35 an hour due to his rightful concerns for black and youth employment. As a result, "between 1982 and 1988, total black employment increased by 2 million, a staggering sum. That meant that blacks gained 15 percent of the new jobs created during that span, while accounting for only 11 percent of the working-age population. Meanwhile, the black jobless rate was cut by almost half between 1982 and 1988. Over the same span, the black employment rate – the percentage of working-age persons holding jobs – increased to record levels, from 49 percent to 56 percent."