« Is President Obama Trying to Intimidate GOP Voters? | Main | Awesome Video From LSU Flag Burning Protest »
May 14, 2011
Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: By the Numbers
Topics: Political News and commentaries
The difference between Reaganomics and Obamanomics is striking in both approach and effect. Each used radically different approaches to deal with the problems they inherited. Reagan sought to reduce the burden of government (a free market approach), whereas Obama viewed government as an engine of growth (a European socialist nanny state approach).
Reaganomics was successful in bringing about an astonishingly long-lasting recovery:
The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.On the other hand, Obamanomics has been a jaw-droppingly dismal failure:During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989.
The shocking rise in inflation during the Nixon and Carter years was reversed. Astoundingly, inflation from 1980 was reduced by more than half by 1982, to 6.2%. It was cut in half again for 1983, to 3.2%, never to be heard from again until recently.
[...] Real per-capita disposable income increased by 18% from 1982 to 1989, meaning the American standard of living increased by almost 20% in just seven years. The poverty rate declined every year from 1984 to 1989, dropping by one-sixth from its peak. The stock market more than tripled in value from 1980 to 1990, a larger increase than in any previous decade.
What is so striking about Obamanomics is how it so doggedly pursues the opposite of every one of these planks of Reaganomics. Instead of reducing tax rates, President Obama is committed to raising the top tax rates of virtually every major federal tax. As already enacted into current law, in 2013 the top two income tax rates will rise by nearly 20%, counting as well Obama's proposed deduction phase-outs.And when you put the difference in a nutshell, the difference is even more striking:The capital gains tax rate will soar by nearly 60%, counting the new Obamacare taxes going into effect that year. The total tax rate on corporate dividends would increase by nearly three times. The Medicare payroll tax would increase by 62% for the nation's job creators and investors. The death tax rate would go back up to 55%. In his 2012 budget and his recent national budget speech, President Obama proposes still more tax increases.
Instead of coming into office with spending cuts, President Obama's first act was a nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill. In his first two years in office he has already increased federal spending by 28%, and his 2012 budget proposes to increase federal spending by another 57% by 2021.
His monetary policy is just the opposite as well. Instead of restraining the money supply to match money demand for a stable dollar, slaying an historic inflation, we have QE1 and QE2 and a steadily collapsing dollar, arguably creating a historic reflation.
As a result, while the Reagan recovery averaged 7.1% economic growth over the first seven quarters, the Obama recovery has produced less than half that at 2.8%, with the last quarter at a dismal 1.8%. After seven quarters of the Reagan recovery, unemployment had fallen 3.3 percentage points from its peak to 7.5%, with only 18% unemployed long-term for 27 weeks or more. After seven quarters of the Obama recovery, unemployment has fallen only 1.3 percentage points from its peak, with a postwar record 45% long-term unemployed.Read the whole thing here - complete with even more numbers.
That's the difference between a Conservative that believes in capitalism and the free market ... and a Leftist Democrat hell-bent on wealth redistribution ... it's also the difference between a free market, freedom-loving president and a president that believes in a European socialist state.
Related video: Dan Mitchell discusses Reagonomics vs. Obamanomics on MSNBC (From Aug 6, 2010 - the economy is much worse today):
Related reading: No Contest When Comparing Reaganomics and Obamanomics (April 2011)
Posted by Richard at May 14, 2011 8:40 AM
Articles Related to Political News and commentaries:
- Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: By the Numbers - May 14, 2011

















