Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: entropy12
“Splitting hair is never a good in making a point. Whether he tripled or doubled or doubled and a half is not important. What is significant is the non-significant increase in spending during his 8 years.”

This is not splitting hair(sic). On a real dollar basis spending increased by 22%. If not adjusted for inflation it was around 70%. Tripling is 300%. You are not even anywhere close.

The true story has far more than this total number. You have to look at everything Reagan accomplished and the political environment in Washington when he was president.

Reagan did an excellent job. The big spending Democrats who controlled Congress, the media and the bureaucracy tried to sabotage him at every step.

It is easy to look back and make false charges against Reagan. But he was a great president who accomplished much under difficult circumstances.

127 posted on 02/27/2015 2:04:24 PM PST by detective
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]


To: detective

Actual budget data from Whitehouse.gov web site:

Year-— Revenue Spending
1981-— 599,272 678,241
1982-— 617,766 745,743
1983-— 600,562 808,364
1984-— 666,438 851,805
1985-— 734,037 946,344
1986-— 769,155 990,382
1987-— 854,287 1,004,017
1988-— 909,238 1,064,416
1989-— 991,104 1,143,743

Spending closer to doubled during Reagan.
I admit my error about tripled.
For a fiscal conservative, doubling the size of
government in 8 years is very bad.


128 posted on 02/27/2015 2:49:55 PM PST by entropy12 (Real function of economists is to make astrologers look respectable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson