This is an old argument, but the basics are that I say Reagan is given far too much credit for the economis prosperity during his reign. He benefitted both from policies Carter began AND from the tech boom in Silicone Valley.
This bit, though, concerns Carter specifically. I don't necessarily say that Carter was the greatest president or that he did all he could have. I do say that to villify him and credit Reagan wholly is wrong.
Night Strike wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:Night Strike wrote:
Jimmy Carter was so horrible that he wasn't even coherent enough to pass a progressive piece of legislation. His legacy is stagflation.
And yet, very "strangely", the economy seemed to just magically boom after his policies were implemented.
ROFLMAO!!!!!
That's priceless!!
It is not my original thinking, though. It is something I have been hearing for over 20 years, most particularly DURING the time Reagan was in office and by folks who were very well meshed in the Reagan "machine". They basically chuckled over how ironic it was that Reagan got to benefit so heavily from the man he villified.
I had to go back a ways in the Google listings to find anything, but here is one example
http://mises.org/daily/535
As the political season stumbles to a close, we need to remember that the historical relationship between economic policy, economic performance, and political rhetoric can be wildly unpredictable. For example, all these years later, it is worth reconsidering the presidency of Jimmy Carter, from 1977 to 1981. Many of the reforms that took place under his watch are responsible for at least some of the current prosperity.
and
Republicans like to point to the failures of the Carter Administration and then claim that Ronald Reagan brought us into the present era. Alas, while I prefer Reagan to Carter, I cannot say that the above statement is true. Granted, much occurred during the Reagan Administration that was good, but if truth be known, many of the important initiatives that enabled those boundaries to expand came from Carter's presidency.
To understand the magnitude of change we have witnessed in the last 20 years or so, remember that in 1980 the Interstate Commerce Commission regulated both trucking and the railroads. "Ma Bell" had a nationwide monopoly in which long distance calls came through copper wires, each strand with the capacity of carrying 15 calls. (A single fiber optic line in use today can carry 2 million calls.)
Airlines had been "deregulated" for only two years. Government controlled the pricing and allocation of oil in the United States. "Regulation Q" and other restrictions on banks and financial institutions kept capital formation in the doldrums. Another way of putting it was that many sectors of this economy were more socialistic then than they are now.
The whole article is here http://mises.org/daily/535 It is definitely not a full endorsement of Carter, but it does make the point I make.. that some of Reagans greatest "achievements" and our economic boom was partially due to Carter's earlier actions.
