Sincere 6 | Reasons Ronald Reagan Was a Terrible President



An important element of the trickle down effect is with regard to income tax cuts for the rich. It is argued that cutting income tax for the rich will not just benefit high-earners, but also everyone. The argument is as follows:

  1. If high income earners see an increase in disposable income, they will increase their spending and this creates additional demand in the economy. This higher level of aggregate demand creates jobs and higher wages for all workers.

  2. Alternatively, increased profits for firms may be reinvested into expanding output. This again leads to higher growth, wages and incomes for all.

  3. Lower income taxes increase the incentive to for people to work leading to higher productivity and economic growth.

Reagan’s Welfare Queen 

It is a known fact that there are more White people on welfare than Black people. Though the percentage of Black people on welfare is larger, the lion’s share of government funds goes to White America — both corporate and personal.

Now, that we know that the face of the most infamous ‘welfare queen’ in the nation is White, maybe the racial narrative will finally begin to change.

Ronald Reagan’s War on Drugs

The presidency of Ronald Reagan marked the start of a long period of skyrocketing rates of incarceration, largely thanks to his unprecedented expansion of the drug war. The number of people behind bars for nonviolent drug law offenses increased from 50,000 in 1980 to over 400,000 by 1997.

Public concern about illicit drug use built throughout the 1980s, largely due to media portrayals of people addicted to the smoke-able form of cocaine dubbed “crack.” Soon after Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, his wife, Nancy Reagan, began a highly-publicized anti-drug campaign, coining the slogan “Just Say No.” This set the stage for the zero tolerance policies implemented in the mid-to-late 1980s. Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl Gates, who believed that “casual drug users should be taken out and shot,” founded the DARE drug education program, which was quickly adopted nationwide despite the lack of evidence of its effectiveness. The increasingly harsh drug policies also blocked the expansion of syringe access programs and other harm reduction policies to reduce the rapid spread of HIV/AIDS.

Ronald Reagan’s Neglect of the AIDS Epidemic

I’ve never met Larry Kramer, but he and I have something in common: In the 1980s, we found Gary Bauer maddeningly obtuse on the question of whether Ronald Reagan should speak to Americans about the AIDS epidemic.

I was a reporter in the San Jose Mercury News Washington bureau covering the federal response to the epidemic. Bauer was a Reagan administration official aligned with other social conservatives resistant to having the president play a visible role on AIDS. Kramer was, and remains, a prominent gay rights activist.

In early 1987, after Bauer became chief White House domestic policy adviser, prominent voices in the medical community were calling for Reagan to deliver a major address about the crisis. Why have a “Great Communicator” in office, they said, if he won’t communicate the message that safe sex is a matter of life-or-death?

Ronald Reagan Arms Soon to Be Terrorist Group

As the public debates some of the more controversial ways the US deals with foreign policy and safety, it’s prudent to remember some of the less than fruitful foreign policy items where America invested its time and money.

This photograph is from 1983, when Reagan and the CIA were dancing around the idea of arming Mujahadin fighters in order to fight back against Soviet incursion in Afghanistan. The result was awell-armed, well-trained group of jihadis who resisted (some say defeated) the onslaught of superior Soviet weaponry.

Ronald Reagan’s Expansion of the Federal Budget 

No federal budget — at least, perhaps, since Calvin Coolidge — has been good news. But President Reagan’s budget for 1983 is the most provocative in living memory, and it has inspired more than the usual criticism. The criticism has about it an air of desperation, as if the deficits and the depredations will have irreversible effects on the economy, and, beyond that, on society and the future of governance in this country.

The administration now projects overall federal spending of $762 billion for 1983, $803 billion for 1984, and, at this writing, admits deficits of $102 billion and $94 billion respectively. Others, including the Congressional Budget Office, say the spending will be almost 10% higher and the deficits will be half again as high. The precise figures do not matter. In any case, they are elusive and subject to almost daily adjustments. The point is the magnitude of the nation’s insolvency, and the factors that are causing it.

Among the notable features of the Reagan 1983 budget, the most egregious is the vast increase in defense spending.


%d bloggers like this: