PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Tax Debates
     Reaganomics

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
admin

|      |       Report Post



Administrator
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

Did Reaganomics improve the Economy? 

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/REAGANOMICS.HTM

(Edited by %1034118332%.)
 


Posts: 31 | Posted: 11:23 AM on May 2, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

no.  Our econemy has sucked since 1600 since discrimination.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 10:46 AM on September 25, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The following is completely falacious:

CON 10.1

The savings rate did not rise in the 1980s, as supply-side advocates had predicted. In fact, in the 1980s the personal savings rate fell from 8 percent to 6.5 percent. If the median family was better off why did their savings go down?

When the economy is in good shape people have more money.  When people have more money they can save.  More people saving means banks do not have to try as hard to attract savers.  Interest rates offered are lower because competition isn't as stiff as in a bad economy.  One might come to the wrong conclusion that they would go up, but since banks don't have to fight over savers the rates go down.


 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 10:41 PM on November 2, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

[color=purple]Take this into consideration!
[color=black]There seems to be alot of good information on this web page, but none of it is cited.  That means that most, if not, all of this good informationis just oppinions.  Rely on facts, not others opponions.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:40 PM on April 19, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Common sense... or the clarification of what should be common sense does not need to be cited...
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:41 PM on April 23, 2003 | IP
Vikeman

|       |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Reaganomics didn't improve the economy. The GDP raise was because the people who already had a lot of money got more more money from Congress, instead of the middle and lower class people who ended up with less money. Because the Rich people got 5 percent of 20 billion dollars (or whatever) and the poorer people got 5% of of 30 thousand dollars, it said that people had more money when infact the majority of people are have less money is because richer people got more money back. SO the Rich got richer by more then the poor got poorer.


-------
Vikeman
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 5:16 PM on May 17, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This statement is totally false.

CON 11

In 1993 Clinton raised the taxes on the rich, the opposite of Reaganomics, opponents argued that this would stop the growing economy. That did not happen.

W inherited a recession from Clinton. Since I am of the "working class" (I am labeled as poor in the US" I know that I pay less taxes than the people on the hill (Los Altos Hills). Therefore it's obvious they will get more back...it's only fair. I even think we are taxed to much, I depend on my money to survive and I don't like to see triple digits being sucked out. They probably dont like seeing 5 digits+ being sucked out. I am not a socialist, I do not believe I should live off of the rich. I believe working with my own hands and getting paid. If I ever did the Smart Thing, and saved more, I might one day be on the hill too. Though, I believe I'd be like the CEO of Cisco, rich beyond belief and live in a mid-class home. 10% across the board is the only right thing. Those who pay more, get more and those who pay none get none. This isn't a socialist country, it should not be the reverse.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 3:31 PM on June 19, 2003 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.