CB quotes the Wikipedia, the font of all knowledge:
> Reaganomics (a portmanteau of Reagan and economics attributed to Paul
> Harvey) refers to the economic policies promoted by the U.S.
> President Ronald Reagan during the 1980s. The four pillars of Reagan's
> economic policy were to:
>
> 1. reduce government spending
> 2. Reduce income, and capital gains marginal tax rates,
> 3. Reduce government regulation,
> 4. Control the money supply to reduce inflation.
That may be what people _mean_ by "Reaganomics," but its different
from what that term means in practice (which is what counts). Instead,
it's a statement of the _ideology_ of Reaganomics, which is nothing
new but a return to "19th century" liberalism or what's now called
"neoliberalism." Maybe we should call it "Pinochetnomics." (But of
course, it's always a mistake to attach too much importance to any
individual So attaching someone's name to a bunch of different
policies is really just for communications' sake.)
Consider these tenets in reverse order.
#4 isn't really part of Reaganomics since monetary policy is not under
the federal government's purview. Instead, it was implemented by the
Federal Reserve, which at the time was run by Paul Volcker, a Carter
appointee. It might thus be seen as part of "Carternomics."
#3: Obviously, this is reducing government regulation _on business_
(and reducing it more for the more powerful segments of business).
When it came to regulation of labor, Reagan upped the ante. For
example, PATCO was simply punished, rather than being able to make
decisions in a free way.
#2: This describes an important part of "Reaganomics" pretty well,
though we should note that "low taxes" and "cheap government" have
been slogans of the petty bourgeoisie and much of the grand
bourgeoisie for more than a century. Also, Reagan did cut taxes for
the rich (as suggested by #2), but he also raised taxes when he (or
rather, his administration) discovered they'd gone too far. Contrary
to the Teabaggers and other GOPsters, Reagan didn't live up to the
standards they attach to him ("no new taxes").
#1 isn't really what Reagan did. In 1980 (BR or "before Reagan"), the
share of federal government purchases in GDP was 8.74%. It then rose
to 9.70% in 1983. Part of that rise is due to the recession of
1981-82, so that this ratio fell to 9.52% in 1984, when the economy
started recovering. But then it rose to 9.79% in 1985 and 9.83% in
1986. As the economy grew and the government's size grew more slowly,
the ratio fell to 9.05% in 1988. But in the end (AR or "after Reagan),
the share of government purchases was slightly above where it started,
at 8.78%. A lot of this had to do with rising militarism, something
the Wikipedia's definition misses.
--
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
