Your Opinion: References in two letters to President Reagan
Thursday, September 15, 2011
My references in two letters to President Reagan and his part in both the situation in which we find ourselves and to the reality of his presidency versus the myth seem to have irritated some readers.
Mr. Horstmann, forgiving your weakness for demagoguery and abusive vitriol, the primary failure of your response is that it seems you misunderstood the whole premise of my letter. My letters of Aug. 5, 18 and 28 directly addressed the validity of “trickle-down economics” as verifiable.
The net effect of the signed budgets, tax legislation, etc. at the end of President Reagan’s term was zero between tax increases and cuts, if not according to some sources to the advantage of increases.
Therefore, you have a net zero on taxes from President Reagan, an increase in taxes under President Clinton who still produced the first balanced budget in decades and President George W. Bush who massively cut taxes with the greatest benefit accruing to the top incomes. During those three presidencies the only growth of any consequence occurred in those of Presidents Reagan and Clinton. The Bush tax cuts produced the lowest job growth in decades. Clinton’s increased taxes and lack of major conflict was most productive.
Considering that Reagan’s increases compensated for a reduction of the top tier rate from 70 percent to 35 percent, the reality was a massive increase in “take home” for the top tier. That principle of reduced tax liability for the top tier has been in effect for thirty years with a notable effect. During those years the greatest disparity in wealth and incomes between the top and the rest of us occurred since the Gilded Age.
Wealth, no matter how little you tax the top tier, does not trickle down.
Also, Mr. Horstmann, your assertion that I am trying to destroy President Reagan’s legacy, and am doing so by merely pointing to the record as it is, leaves me bewildered that factual records of budgets, etc. seem so poisonous for you. If we insist that dogma and myth are more important than historical reality, we cannot expect any appropriate response when we need one. Operating in the fog of myth versus reality can never produce positive results. Otherwise, we would still be convinced that the world is flat and the earth is the center of the universe.
The rest is a tarring of socialist, liberal, Democratic this and that.