Reaganomics Finally Trickles Down To Area Man
On a slightly lighter note from the Onion:
October 13, 2007 HAZELWOOD, MO—Twenty-six years after Ronald Reagan first set his controversial fiscal policies into motion, the deceased president’s massive tax cuts for the ultrarich at last trickled all the way down to deliver their bounty, in the form of a $10 bonus, to Hazelwood, MO car-wash attendant Frank Kellener.
“Back when Reagan was in charge, I didn’t think much of him,” Kellener, 57, said, holding up two five-dollar bills nearly three decades in the making. “But who would have thought that in 2007 I’d have this extra $10 in my pocket? He may not have lived to see it, but I’m sure President Reagan is up in heaven smiling down on me right now.”
Leading economists say Kellener’s unexpected windfall provides the first irrefutable proof of the effectiveness of Reagan’s so-called supply-side economics, and shows that the former president had “incredible, far-reaching foresight.”
October 17th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Whereas in NZ we are still waiting for a bit to trickle up
October 17th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Look, i know your still angry at him for defeating communism and destorying that socialist ‘utopia’ formally know as the USSR, but there’s no need for this sort of joke article about the guy. Reagan cut taxes on a grand scale, and even if he hadn’t thats still $10 more then Helen Clark has ever given New Zealanders. And Russel, i think you layed it on a bit think there with the term “supply side economics” mate, given that it’s mostly green voters reading this blog. If they new anything about the economy they would be voting National!
October 17th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
have you ever heard of the Onion Nick? Have you ever heard of irony? For that matter, have you ever heard of the concept of quoting?
October 17th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Nick C,
learn some history, he never defeated communisim or socialism. the USSR fell from internal preasures arising from corruption and China fell as a communist state because of an over optimisim by the populas (over reporting of production, etc) and corruption into what it is currently, one of the most progressed capitalist states (in that the working class is massive, the upper class is tiny and the distance is great, kind of like the national party would like), socialism is still very much alive.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Sapient: The USSR was forced to end communism because their economy was collapsing. Why was it colapsing? Because they were trying to compete with Reagan’s Strategic Defence Initiative program to shoot down missles from space and make the US safe from their ISBM’s. This tipped the balance with the mutually assured destruction theory (as the US could launch an attack on soviet cities without being attacked itself). So the Communists spent up trying to develop similar system, backrupting them. Therefore it is fair to say that Reagan had a big hand in topling the Soviets.
The National party believes in equality of oppourtunity, so that everyone has a chance at success provided they try hard enough at school. Labour however believes to a certain extent in equality of outcome, so no matter how hard you try at school you always get the basic means provided to you by those who did try hard at school. The greens however are much more distrusting of capitalism and the economic theory of the free market, probably because they know very little about it. Free market capatilism works, socialists dont like to admit this but it’s a fact.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Yawn, yet another “free market” proponent who accusses us of not understanding capitalism and the “free market” while actually revealing his own naive ignorance.
Personally, as a mutualist anarchist, I say good riddance to the USSR it was worse than the United States in its brutality, repression, and suppression of dissent, but not by as much as most presume and according to Trotsky and many other communists, wasn’t even a true communist regime. I remember vividly the fall of the Berlin Wall even though I was only 6 years old.
Although the Soviet Union’s economy was extremely inefficient even by Western standards, it didn’t fall, because of that, but because thanks to the Saudi’s deal with the United States, they abandoned the Oil Embargo and increased production after Oil Crisis, which devastated the Soviet Union’s ability to pay foreign exchange for its imports as the value of its exports (principally hydrocarbons) collapsed in relation to its needs (especially grain and luxury Western goods).
http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.25991,filter.all/pub_detail.asp
The Strategic Defence Initiative had nothing to do with the economic collapse as it was necessary for the Soviet Union to have been able to either supply all the materials and technology for the system itself or steal it from the West as they would not have been able to import it for military use.
“The National party believes in equality of oppourtunity, so that everyone has a chance at success provided they try hard enough at school.”
So you’ve never heard of the strategic deficit?
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0508/S00023.htm
Sorry to destroy you illusions, but the so-called “free-market” capitalism doesn’t exist least of all in the United States, save perhaps for small business who make do with eating crumbs that fall from the Crony (Corporate) Capitalist’s tables.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1274
“Free market capatilism works, socialists dont like to admit this but it’s a fact.”
You mean free market capitalism works for the rich? Yeah it certainly does, but then all types of economies have always worked for the wealthy elites. Always have.
Oh right. Its lifted billions out of poverty so that they can now live on a dollar a day. I wonder if that dollar’s inflation adjusted.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
how is it equal opportunity if a child cant go to school because the childs parents cant afford it? if that child cant get access to education about numeracy and basic gramatical skills how are they ment to advance in the world? a child shouldint be doomed becasue of their parents mistakes, particuly when those mistakes are activly incouraged by political system