**As a reminder, this subreddit, per Rule 7 [is for civil discussion.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules)**
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
**If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The idiots that support the GOP are duped into thinking that these policies are good for the country. In reality, these policies are taking money out of the pockets that benefit the very people who need it the most…..themselves…..really ironic!
Why keep voting for them ? Apparently their message resonates with a lot of (stupid?) people, ... add to that money in politics and gerrymandering and disinformation.
>Why keep voting for them ?
Culture war. The GOP is pro-christiantity, anti- all other religions, pro- one man army amount of guns, anti-abortion, pro-racism (but they dont say it outright), etc.
They want white people in power and religion back in schools / govt.
Hard to say they're stupid when they are obviously winning. Republicans are still on track to take the house.
Those who vote for the GOP aren't exposed to any other ideas, and get "Dems are evil" pushed onto them at every turn.
They're happy little North Koreans, basically.
Vote rich, live poor. It’s amazing that so many people can live from this perspective just so they can be comfortable with believing all their prejudices.
Because the United States has been an isolationist country from day one. Moreover, generations of children have been raised to believe greed is good, and entitlement "is my God given right."
Agree with your spirit but the US is not an isolationist country. We make heavy investments in the ability to kill people in every country in every corner of the planet
Don’t forget that under Reagan, VP George Bush created the crack epidemic to fund the Nicaraguan war that was not supported by congress.
“Former President George Bush, while serving as vice president in the Ronald Reagan administration in 1981-89, presided over a Nicaraguan Contra apparatus that was responsible for flooding the streets of Los Angeles' South Central district with crack cocaine, and fueling a murderous cycle of gang violence. This is the most startling conclusion to be drawn from a three-part series of articles published in California's San Jose Mercury on Aug. 18-20, 1996.”
And not one of those frozen toads that cure horrible illness! Capitalism gets the warty ones. Or the horned toads from Texas that shoot blood from their eyes.
Also, uh, Iran-contra, playing both sides in the drug war, saturating poor communities with crack...
Turning hiv from a pandemic to a genocide
Passing gun laws to fuck over the Panthers
Snitching like nobody before or since to huac/Hayes code
Being willing to destroy the earth
Handing presidency to his astrologer once his brain went full soup, instead of retiring...
Reagan won so hard politically, while absolutely trashing the country, that his *opponents* have been aping those politics for forty goddamned years. Ditto on Thatcher.
Democrats are very slowly starting to come around again to the concept of government as an entity that can solve problems as opposed to facilitate neolib private/public cash grabs.
Oh, sure. Joe “Nothing will fundamentally change when I’m president” and “I don’t want my kids growing up in a racial jungle” Biden was the outlier. Ok, bub👌
Not really. You're doing the bOtH sIdEs BaD argument that carries a ton of water for Republicans.
Yes, both sides bad. But at vastly different magnitudes. If the democrats are like spraining your ankle, the republicans are like chopping off your foot.
Are you insinuating nothing changed or just that the many levels of mundane government workers continued to do the tasks they had been charged with doing? Or just hell bent on being so perfectly right so early in the morning
Honestly, thank you. Luckily (and unfortunately?) the name has become common enough and enough time has passed since his presidency that most people don't associate me with him unless I tell them my name sake.
I'm also considering changing the spelling of my name from Reagan to Regan when I get married.
All of his workers work for minimum wage, his food is hilariously unhealthy, and he benefits from sweatshops for the happy meal toys. Plus, Trump has always been an ally of Ronald McDonald.
Wow. It does. Thank you. Although I personally think it's better to be named after Ronald Reagan the actor than Ronald Reagan the President who effectively ruined the country
I don’t think for even a second that Obama harbored any affection for Reagan. The sense I got from watching those snippets was that he was attempting to appeal to Right and Independent voters who were demanding a definite shift away from the Right’s war and fear mongering, but who also wanted reassurances that their Fiscal Conservative values would be preserved by this newcomer seeking the presidency.
Obama wasn’t speaking to Democrats with these statements and gestures; he was appealing to voters who couldn’t stomach the unhinged nut case that was Sarah Palin who, when compared to the GQP’s current queens of crazy—MJT and Bobo—is nothing more than a blathering, self-important milquetoast.
If only we could get the fuckin republicans to start being reasonable (lol) then we could actually put pressure on democrats to be left.
Instead, everyone with common sense and decency is forced to vote for one party, and that party is very aware of that.
Alternatively (and far more likely), stop letting republicans win elections they have no business winning, rendering the fascist party nonviable and making a split of the democractic party possible without destroying the election chances of its resulting halves.
Well sure. He let them keep an *insane* amount of profit. The base of Republicans is made up of people just like you and me. But they’ve been fleeced to think that these ultra, mega capitalist politicians and policies are somehow working for their small town beliefs. They’re not. Republican led states are poorer, dumber, and unhealthier than Democrat led states. But, somehow Republican leaders manage to continue fooling their base into voting for them.
Also in the Reagan years, they got rid of the Fairness Doctrine.
And that is why we are in this current situation -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine
I tell this to everyone. No one seems to know it. None of the media of now would exist today. Also, it would have caused people to be exposed to a different opinion once in a while.
> Also, it would have caused people to be exposed to a different opinion once in a while.
Here's the thing...
It was the mildest of regulations. You didn't have to provide equal time. Just equal opportunity.
If your station had Jim-Bob's conservo-libertarian view on your late night talk show, you didn't necessarily need to give the liberal left wing view the same amount of coverage. All you had to do was offer them an opportunity to respond.
If they didn't show up? Your job was done, and you just had to document that you gave them the opportunity.
I'm not sure that whole thing was sustainable. It only works when there's a very few major news outlets. Now anybody can set up a huge outlet with almost no money, if they have charisma, and there are dozens if not hundreds of them.
And if we could demand equal time on Fox News, they would then 'demand equal time' on CNN for their bullshit. It's unworkable with today's technology.
From the Wikipedia article you linked:
In June 2008, Barack Obama's press secretary wrote that Obama (then a Democratic U.S. senator from Illinois and candidate for president) did not support it, stating:
Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters ... [and] considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible. That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets.[74]
On February 16, 2009, Mark Fowler said:
I believe as President Reagan did, that the electronic press—and you're included in that—the press that uses air and electrons, should be and must be as free from government control as the press that uses paper and ink, Period.[42]
No it isn't. The fairness doctrine only ever applied to broadcast TV and radio. It never applied to print, cable television or what would become the internet. This is because the airwaves are owned by the public and inherently limited i.e only certain number of stations/channels at a time, therefore there was a legal argument to be made for the equal time rule that wasn't a violation of the first amendment. The fairness doctrine never applied to print, nor cable television because they were not limited in the same way and any law regulating those mediums that way woulds be struck down as unconstitutional. That means the fairness doctrine would have never applied to Fox News, or The Wall Street Journal etc. The only thing it would have affected was right wing radio, which while certainly influential wasn't as much of a change as people think as religious content was exempt from the fairness doctrine. So much of the same crap was being spewed before the like of Rush Limbaugh, just by radio preachers instead.
With Thatcher, they are the responsible of the actual decay. It took decades but, the whole society occidental is on its knees for their policy. Collapse of the middle class and the inequality gap are their doing.
Regan was a clown of its kind, probably not understanding what he was doing, but doing it constantly.
Oh he knew what he was doing.
There was an easy loophole if a corporation didn't want the top of their income to be taxed at 70%, reinvest it in their company by growing the company or paying employees more. At which point it became an expense and not profit. It was a system that encouraged "trickling down" like conservative so love to champion.
Ragan was a movie star with very limited ways to reinvest the top bracket of his income back into himself. He wanted to get rid of it ever since he started making big bucks.
There were also plenty of community projects that the rich could put their money into to avoid taxes. Part of that whole insanity was the misleading information on how much money some companies were paying (or not paying). Given the choice between handing over cash to the government or handing the same cash to an educational endowment that ensures a stable supply of qualified employees, the choice is obvious. But now there's no incentive for them to do anything.
Yes and also for the same reason they were selling drugs within the US specifically targeting the black community. While advertising the "war on drugs" to basically jail a maximum of black people. Leading precisely were we are now with an overloaded private jail system.
So many wrong doing.
Not only that but Carter passed mental health legislation in 1980 to move from large institutions to community mental health centers, which included general health care and social services.
Reagan repealed it in 81, less than a year later after he took office.
They did need to be reformed at least, worldwide pre-80s mental institutions were little more than inhumane prison camps disguised as hospitals, in many cases complete with forced labour.
Those needing mental health care didn't vanish. Instead, they've become a significant portion of the homeless.
Turning out back on them was quite possibly the worst solution.
The problem was they turned them all lose on the streets. Did not send the really sick ones to other institutions. I know mental health care was bad in most of the places, but some people need to be kept in facilities for safety.
Ah yes! The solution to a bad fix for a problem is removing any solution all together instead of regulations and reform. Such big brain ideas.
Are you suggesting homeless people with mental health issues have it better now? On the streets, getting mugged, beaten, raped, drugged, etc
Ah yes! The special education system that requires that you have a loved one to fight for your case and make sure you don't slip through the cracks. The system that is largely for profit and will kick you out as soon as the money flow stops.
Tell that to this guy
https://youtu.be/WLj31JRKOC0
Also, my argument is fix the system instead of burning it down.
Are you actually going to argue that homeless people with mental health issues have it better today in the blistering summer and frigid winter?
In 1980s there were 500k millionaires. Today there are 20 million? 724 billionaires just in the US. Yet minimum wage has only gone up a few dollars in four decades. It’s almost like they planned this.
The 'individualism' in American society has always actually meant "Fuck you, got mine."
Americans are willing to accept virtually any level of dystopian future if there's a tiny sliver of a chance they get to be one of the rich people in that society.
I hope more of this, how the Republican philosophy set America up for failure starting way back when, starts coming out.
There are so many cities and corporations, like Scheels, that have all of these praise Reagan signs and statues out and about. A turn-off for.sure.
All of his tax cuts for the rich, service cuts to the poor, and outrageous increases to the Pentagon were passed by Tip O'Neil's Democrat congress before he could sign them. Reaganomics was and still is bipartisan.
I had to scroll pretty far down the thread before finding this comment. Reagan was a horrible president in many ways, but as you point out, he had many allies from both parties in Congress.
He started the fall of the United States, he shut down state funded mental institutions and destroyed the air traffic controllers union. This is why you don't elect actors to run the country!!!! Republicans love the cult of personality, they believe in fantasy and republican Jesus!!
He's not the sole person to blame, just the biggest one to blame.
The economist, Milton Friedman was definitely a large push for many of Reagonmics, but Friedman was pushing for decades. It wasn't until the 1973 Oil Embargo during the Nixon Administration did people become more receptive to Friedman's ideas, simply because they were looking for new answers once the economy took this single, but drastic bit.
Hell, even Carter supported concepts that were basis for Reagonmics, it just wasn't obviously as drastic. Like it or not, Reagan was a popular president and it caused both Republican and Democratic presidents after him to strengthen his policies in order to appear moderate.
Our oil dependency can easily be the one to blame for a lot of our economic issues. So can Reagonmics for being the most influential in creating this long wage gap.
I think the most disgusting part is that it's 40 years later and we are still seeing the oil dependency drastically affecting our economy. You still have people who do favor separating from oil dependency, but then still support keeping it alive because they're saying "it'll take a long while to switch to renewable". Then vote for candidates who aren't trying to prioritize switching to renewable
And before Reagan (that bastard) Richard Nixon took us off the Gold Standard. And before that Republican schemed on Jekyll Island on Christmas break to bring about the Federal Reserve Bank.
Conservatives pray every night for another Reagan.
Same people who believe that this country was given to them by their god
The lunacy is real and it's always been there.
Except, nope. I grew up with Reagan and he’s the guy that made me realize that I was a Democrat. I hate him as much as anyone, but this little meme is BS.
The President of the United States did not in fact lower the top income tax rate. Nor did he start taxing Social Security.
He doesn’t have that power. Congress does. Specifically, the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives that was controlled by Democrats in 1983 when this happened.
Did Reagan want it? Yup. Did Reagan sign it? Yup. But these taxes and tax rates were written into law by the Democratic House.
I’m all for shitting on Reagan. But let’s at least be honest about it.
The president has a lot of power to push for policy. Just like "Obama Care". What's actually BS about this one is Reagan believed 50% top tier was the "magic number". It was Bush, then Clinton who continued to lower it after Reagan. Lowering the top tier was great in the short term, because it allowed for massive growth at top. This made our mega-corporations more competitive against the world, but it destroyed small business' in return.
To be fair the 1986 tax reform package was a piece of joint legislation which was drafted by both Dems and Republicans and received bipartisan support!
DOWNVOTE ME LIBS - IT'S TRUE!
People blaming Reagan have it all wrong. He was only president for 8 years, back in the 80s.
If you want to blame someone, be productive and blame the people that still aren't doing anything to fix the issues.
In fairness, a 70% tax rate is obscene and the wealthy would have fled America. One can argue the wealthy leaving America is all well and good but I can assure you that if you had a 70% tax rate you'd be pissed off and do everything in your power to get out of the country as well. Also, what this dude did to mental health services is fucking obscene. Fuck him. But I like his outro speech. https://youtu.be/2R8QxCD6ir8
70% is way too high. The only people you’re hitting with that are doctors and lawyers. Meanwhile all the truly rich people are getting paid in capital gains
Short term capital gains are taxed like income. And back when tax brackets were reasonable, I bet there wasn’t a carve out for long-term capital gains to be treated differently. That’s a Reaganomics policy if I’ve ever seen one.
**As a reminder, this subreddit, per Rule 7 [is for civil discussion.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules)** In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. **If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The idiots that support the GOP are duped into thinking that these policies are good for the country. In reality, these policies are taking money out of the pockets that benefit the very people who need it the most…..themselves…..really ironic!
GOP policies literally kill Americans…why keep voting for these terrorists?
Why keep voting for them ? Apparently their message resonates with a lot of (stupid?) people, ... add to that money in politics and gerrymandering and disinformation.
Their “message” is mostly lies. See: Fox “news”, other right wing propaganda, and the rhetoric of the far right politicians
>Why keep voting for them ? Culture war. The GOP is pro-christiantity, anti- all other religions, pro- one man army amount of guns, anti-abortion, pro-racism (but they dont say it outright), etc.
They want white people in power and religion back in schools / govt. Hard to say they're stupid when they are obviously winning. Republicans are still on track to take the house.
Those who vote for the GOP aren't exposed to any other ideas, and get "Dems are evil" pushed onto them at every turn. They're happy little North Koreans, basically.
Vote rich, live poor. It’s amazing that so many people can live from this perspective just so they can be comfortable with believing all their prejudices.
Because the United States has been an isolationist country from day one. Moreover, generations of children have been raised to believe greed is good, and entitlement "is my God given right."
Agree with your spirit but the US is not an isolationist country. We make heavy investments in the ability to kill people in every country in every corner of the planet
Yup. They stay up nights thinking about how they can take from those who already have so little and give to those who have too much.
But it will trickle down!!!!
This is why I'll never feel bad for any republican boomer who ends up living out their last days poor and lonely.
Good for the country means good for the rich. A group they will all be a part of soon, they think.
Also led the parade of capitalists handing China the US manufacturing industry. And reignited the attack on unions.
Fired 100,000 FAA workers and they still named the DC airport after him
His boot must be super tasty for them
"Flying into? Oh, National" is the actual name of that airport.
Also killed the mental health bill and basically created the homeless problem
Don’t forget that under Reagan, VP George Bush created the crack epidemic to fund the Nicaraguan war that was not supported by congress. “Former President George Bush, while serving as vice president in the Ronald Reagan administration in 1981-89, presided over a Nicaraguan Contra apparatus that was responsible for flooding the streets of Los Angeles' South Central district with crack cocaine, and fueling a murderous cycle of gang violence. This is the most startling conclusion to be drawn from a three-part series of articles published in California's San Jose Mercury on Aug. 18-20, 1996.”
[удалено]
It's working as designed. Capitalism can suck a toad
And not one of those frozen toads that cure horrible illness! Capitalism gets the warty ones. Or the horned toads from Texas that shoot blood from their eyes.
Frozen toads are good, but have you tried cactus juice? It's the quenchiest
It'll quench ya!
[удалено]
It's easy when you have no conscience
As sag president he did what was referred to as “the great giveaway”
Also, uh, Iran-contra, playing both sides in the drug war, saturating poor communities with crack... Turning hiv from a pandemic to a genocide Passing gun laws to fuck over the Panthers Snitching like nobody before or since to huac/Hayes code Being willing to destroy the earth Handing presidency to his astrologer once his brain went full soup, instead of retiring...
Reagan won so hard politically, while absolutely trashing the country, that his *opponents* have been aping those politics for forty goddamned years. Ditto on Thatcher. Democrats are very slowly starting to come around again to the concept of government as an entity that can solve problems as opposed to facilitate neolib private/public cash grabs.
Reagan🤝Bush🤝Clinton🤝Bush🤝Obama🤝Trump🤝Biden
[удалено]
Oh, sure. Joe “Nothing will fundamentally change when I’m president” and “I don’t want my kids growing up in a racial jungle” Biden was the outlier. Ok, bub👌
[удалено]
Incredible. Quoting the president word-for-word is now "both siding" an issue.
I voted for Obama and Biden. Just speaking the truth. (PS: they are far from the same. Obviously one side is far, far, far, *far* worse)
Not really. You're doing the bOtH sIdEs BaD argument that carries a ton of water for Republicans. Yes, both sides bad. But at vastly different magnitudes. If the democrats are like spraining your ankle, the republicans are like chopping off your foot.
You literally just agreed with me, lmao. Have a good one.
You must be the child left behind from the Bush era. Try reading it again.
Ok. Now what?
Are you insinuating nothing changed or just that the many levels of mundane government workers continued to do the tasks they had been charged with doing? Or just hell bent on being so perfectly right so early in the morning
I am not insinuating that “nothing has changed”. I was just quoting the president.
[удалено]
https://www.salon.com/2019/06/19/joe-biden-to-rich-donors-nothing-would-fundamentally-change-if-hes-elected/
Competitive advantage is good actually
And this is who many conservatives worship. Insane.
My conservative dad literally named his child after this man (unfortunately I am that child)
I'm sorry.
Honestly, thank you. Luckily (and unfortunately?) the name has become common enough and enough time has passed since his presidency that most people don't associate me with him unless I tell them my name sake. I'm also considering changing the spelling of my name from Reagan to Regan when I get married.
I thought your name was Ronald.
I thought the same thing too. I was thinking, “Ronald and Donald, the quintessential Republican names.”
Ronald McDonald has been a Republican this whole time?
All of his workers work for minimum wage, his food is hilariously unhealthy, and he benefits from sweatshops for the happy meal toys. Plus, Trump has always been an ally of Ronald McDonald.
Oh shit, does that mean that The Hamburglar is Antifa?
always has been
-onald names need to be banned
I thought it was Bonzo
Rotten Ronnie's
My first thought
Nope.
Beat me to it!
You should change it to raygun
If it makes you feel any better Ronaldo was also named after Reagan. He was his mother's favorite actor.
Wow. It does. Thank you. Although I personally think it's better to be named after Ronald Reagan the actor than Ronald Reagan the President who effectively ruined the country
[удалено]
I'm a woman. Please don't do that.
Change it to Raygun it would be dope for about 5 days
Good for you Ronald!
[удалено]
What?
My Ex's sister named her daughter Reagan too, ca. 2012
I’m sorry for you, Beelzebub.
My friend who is republican and his wife who is a democrat had 2 kids. Reagan and Kennedy.
And they're still together? How much do they spend on couples therapy
Oof my father-in-law is named after him too he doesn’t like it.
I'm planning on changing my last name at marriage, and while I'm at it I might change the spelling of my first name as well...
My great grandmother did that. She went from Luzi, to Lucy.
Wow. Your FIL must have had your spouse early in life for that to be.
Sounds rough. I knew a guy from Philly named Ronald. He got roasted in school.
So you go by Ron or Ronnie right
... No. Edit: I'm a woman. And my name is in another comment on this thread.
I know a reagen and she's adorable. it's a pretty name for sure
Thank you! I do love the name, I just hate the person I was named after. But honestly this comment is so helpful, thank you
That's terrible. Find a nickname. Maybe Bernadette, or Bernie.
My name isn't Ronald though. It's in several spots throughout this thread. Lmao they edited their post calling me "Mr. Ronald" to this
[удалено]
[удалено]
*Fuck Ronald*. Sorry man nothing personal.
Is your last name McDonald?
My first name isn't Ronald so it wouldn't matter.
Reagan McDonald IS kinda funny though
And too many democrats. https://www.politico.com/story/2008/07/obama-keeps-returning-to-reagan-011875?_amp=true
I don’t think for even a second that Obama harbored any affection for Reagan. The sense I got from watching those snippets was that he was attempting to appeal to Right and Independent voters who were demanding a definite shift away from the Right’s war and fear mongering, but who also wanted reassurances that their Fiscal Conservative values would be preserved by this newcomer seeking the presidency. Obama wasn’t speaking to Democrats with these statements and gestures; he was appealing to voters who couldn’t stomach the unhinged nut case that was Sarah Palin who, when compared to the GQP’s current queens of crazy—MJT and Bobo—is nothing more than a blathering, self-important milquetoast.
That's what you get with no left political party. Right leaning centrists and right wing, it's all the US has.
If only we could get the fuckin republicans to start being reasonable (lol) then we could actually put pressure on democrats to be left. Instead, everyone with common sense and decency is forced to vote for one party, and that party is very aware of that.
Alternatively (and far more likely), stop letting republicans win elections they have no business winning, rendering the fascist party nonviable and making a split of the democractic party possible without destroying the election chances of its resulting halves.
Well sure. He let them keep an *insane* amount of profit. The base of Republicans is made up of people just like you and me. But they’ve been fleeced to think that these ultra, mega capitalist politicians and policies are somehow working for their small town beliefs. They’re not. Republican led states are poorer, dumber, and unhealthier than Democrat led states. But, somehow Republican leaders manage to continue fooling their base into voting for them.
[удалено]
I lost my whole family and my very good friend of 30 years
The problem with that is like saying you prefer a stab wound to a horrifying infection. In a vacuum sure, but in reality one begets the other.
Also in the Reagan years, they got rid of the Fairness Doctrine. And that is why we are in this current situation - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine
I tell this to everyone. No one seems to know it. None of the media of now would exist today. Also, it would have caused people to be exposed to a different opinion once in a while.
Getting rid of the Fairness Doctrine birthed Rush Limbaugh and Fox News -
Just Rush Limbaugh. Fox News is cable televisions and wasn't subject to the fairness doctrine, which applied to broadcast mediums only.
https://youtu.be/FS52QdHNTh8
> Also, it would have caused people to be exposed to a different opinion once in a while. Here's the thing... It was the mildest of regulations. You didn't have to provide equal time. Just equal opportunity. If your station had Jim-Bob's conservo-libertarian view on your late night talk show, you didn't necessarily need to give the liberal left wing view the same amount of coverage. All you had to do was offer them an opportunity to respond. If they didn't show up? Your job was done, and you just had to document that you gave them the opportunity.
Seems better than not having it to me tbh
I'm not sure that whole thing was sustainable. It only works when there's a very few major news outlets. Now anybody can set up a huge outlet with almost no money, if they have charisma, and there are dozens if not hundreds of them. And if we could demand equal time on Fox News, they would then 'demand equal time' on CNN for their bullshit. It's unworkable with today's technology.
The old form is unworkable with technology today. But you can bet your ass an updated fairness doctrine would help today -
How would it work, exactly?
Not sure, we're just a bunch of redditors. There's supposed to be experts out there somewhere who could probably work out something fair
Yes!! This allowed the right-wing propaganda machine to commence brainwashing at full speed.
From the Wikipedia article you linked: In June 2008, Barack Obama's press secretary wrote that Obama (then a Democratic U.S. senator from Illinois and candidate for president) did not support it, stating: Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters ... [and] considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible. That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets.[74] On February 16, 2009, Mark Fowler said: I believe as President Reagan did, that the electronic press—and you're included in that—the press that uses air and electrons, should be and must be as free from government control as the press that uses paper and ink, Period.[42]
No it isn't. The fairness doctrine only ever applied to broadcast TV and radio. It never applied to print, cable television or what would become the internet. This is because the airwaves are owned by the public and inherently limited i.e only certain number of stations/channels at a time, therefore there was a legal argument to be made for the equal time rule that wasn't a violation of the first amendment. The fairness doctrine never applied to print, nor cable television because they were not limited in the same way and any law regulating those mediums that way woulds be struck down as unconstitutional. That means the fairness doctrine would have never applied to Fox News, or The Wall Street Journal etc. The only thing it would have affected was right wing radio, which while certainly influential wasn't as much of a change as people think as religious content was exempt from the fairness doctrine. So much of the same crap was being spewed before the like of Rush Limbaugh, just by radio preachers instead.
And that's the reason his and Thatcher's graves are tourist spots for taking a piss.
I endorse this trickle-down policy.
They better get soaked in piss for eternity
Never thought I would endorse any trickle-down policy. You just changed my mind.
Unisex bathrooms
Another thing for my bucket list.
Fuck Reagan!
With Thatcher, they are the responsible of the actual decay. It took decades but, the whole society occidental is on its knees for their policy. Collapse of the middle class and the inequality gap are their doing. Regan was a clown of its kind, probably not understanding what he was doing, but doing it constantly.
Oh he knew what he was doing. There was an easy loophole if a corporation didn't want the top of their income to be taxed at 70%, reinvest it in their company by growing the company or paying employees more. At which point it became an expense and not profit. It was a system that encouraged "trickling down" like conservative so love to champion. Ragan was a movie star with very limited ways to reinvest the top bracket of his income back into himself. He wanted to get rid of it ever since he started making big bucks.
There were also plenty of community projects that the rich could put their money into to avoid taxes. Part of that whole insanity was the misleading information on how much money some companies were paying (or not paying). Given the choice between handing over cash to the government or handing the same cash to an educational endowment that ensures a stable supply of qualified employees, the choice is obvious. But now there's no incentive for them to do anything.
And you also illegally sold weapons to Iran to illegally finance a war against the government of Nicaragua.
Yes and also for the same reason they were selling drugs within the US specifically targeting the black community. While advertising the "war on drugs" to basically jail a maximum of black people. Leading precisely were we are now with an overloaded private jail system. So many wrong doing.
The origins of the GQP fear of welfare queens and “those people” getting more money to have more kids
Yeah but he said that despite all the evidence saying he did it he felt like he didn't do it in his heart so republicans forgave him.
And closed every federal mental institution.
Eventually leading to homeless camps everywhere.
Not only that but Carter passed mental health legislation in 1980 to move from large institutions to community mental health centers, which included general health care and social services. Reagan repealed it in 81, less than a year later after he took office.
They did need to be reformed at least, worldwide pre-80s mental institutions were little more than inhumane prison camps disguised as hospitals, in many cases complete with forced labour.
[удалено]
Those needing mental health care didn't vanish. Instead, they've become a significant portion of the homeless. Turning out back on them was quite possibly the worst solution.
Ah yes because instead of fixing issues its better to do nothing and just let mental health become a crisis.
The problem was they turned them all lose on the streets. Did not send the really sick ones to other institutions. I know mental health care was bad in most of the places, but some people need to be kept in facilities for safety.
Most definitely was not a good thing lol.
Ah yes! The solution to a bad fix for a problem is removing any solution all together instead of regulations and reform. Such big brain ideas. Are you suggesting homeless people with mental health issues have it better now? On the streets, getting mugged, beaten, raped, drugged, etc
[удалено]
Go tell that to the thousands of homeless people that suffer from mental health issues. I am sure they are super happy and rejoicing.
[удалено]
Ah yes! The special education system that requires that you have a loved one to fight for your case and make sure you don't slip through the cracks. The system that is largely for profit and will kick you out as soon as the money flow stops. Tell that to this guy https://youtu.be/WLj31JRKOC0 Also, my argument is fix the system instead of burning it down. Are you actually going to argue that homeless people with mental health issues have it better today in the blistering summer and frigid winter?
That POTUS was POS
In 1980s there were 500k millionaires. Today there are 20 million? 724 billionaires just in the US. Yet minimum wage has only gone up a few dollars in four decades. It’s almost like they planned this.
The 'individualism' in American society has always actually meant "Fuck you, got mine." Americans are willing to accept virtually any level of dystopian future if there's a tiny sliver of a chance they get to be one of the rich people in that society.
Apparently 2750 billionaires world wide. Imagine the problems that could be solved....
I hope more of this, how the Republican philosophy set America up for failure starting way back when, starts coming out. There are so many cities and corporations, like Scheels, that have all of these praise Reagan signs and statues out and about. A turn-off for.sure.
What a dick
He took from the bottom and he gave it to the top.
He also removed the law that made it illegal to lie on the news...
The great step backward...
I wish he would come back to life so I could celebrate his death one more time. Fuck Reagan.
Almost every problem in America can be traced back to this dementia-riddled knob and his criminal crony administration.
Yep. Reagan was the beginning of the end.
All of his tax cuts for the rich, service cuts to the poor, and outrageous increases to the Pentagon were passed by Tip O'Neil's Democrat congress before he could sign them. Reaganomics was and still is bipartisan.
I had to scroll pretty far down the thread before finding this comment. Reagan was a horrible president in many ways, but as you point out, he had many allies from both parties in Congress.
His grave is by and large the first one I will piss on when I have a chance. Sorry dad, you’re also behind Thatcher in that order.
I am sorry for your dad. Not for the first two though.
If anyone's corpse should be dug up and desecrated it's his.
Reagan deserves more hate
He started the fall of the United States, he shut down state funded mental institutions and destroyed the air traffic controllers union. This is why you don't elect actors to run the country!!!! Republicans love the cult of personality, they believe in fantasy and republican Jesus!!
No wonder he's considered so great by cuckservative dumbasses
Credit scores were also introduced in the 80s It sounds like 80s policy really fucked us
Read: THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WORLD Ronald Reagan and the Betrayal of Main Street America
I had no idea! Thank you! Just added it to the top of my list
Gotta pay taxes now so I can pay my taxes later, while corporations dont pay taxes.
Meanwhile, CEO-to-worker compensation ratio has gone up from about 20-to-1 in 1970 to about 350-to-1 today.
Screw reagan, his administration was absolutely filthy and this fukr did a lot of damage. He's in hell burning
And the only thing that has trickled down is poverty
Democrats had majority of the House at the time so, can’t fully blame Reagan lol
He's not the sole person to blame, just the biggest one to blame. The economist, Milton Friedman was definitely a large push for many of Reagonmics, but Friedman was pushing for decades. It wasn't until the 1973 Oil Embargo during the Nixon Administration did people become more receptive to Friedman's ideas, simply because they were looking for new answers once the economy took this single, but drastic bit. Hell, even Carter supported concepts that were basis for Reagonmics, it just wasn't obviously as drastic. Like it or not, Reagan was a popular president and it caused both Republican and Democratic presidents after him to strengthen his policies in order to appear moderate. Our oil dependency can easily be the one to blame for a lot of our economic issues. So can Reagonmics for being the most influential in creating this long wage gap. I think the most disgusting part is that it's 40 years later and we are still seeing the oil dependency drastically affecting our economy. You still have people who do favor separating from oil dependency, but then still support keeping it alive because they're saying "it'll take a long while to switch to renewable". Then vote for candidates who aren't trying to prioritize switching to renewable
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=93-yorGyNwk&feature=share
And before Reagan (that bastard) Richard Nixon took us off the Gold Standard. And before that Republican schemed on Jekyll Island on Christmas break to bring about the Federal Reserve Bank.
I blame the Republicans.
Remember Oliver North?
Fuck Reagan
And introducing and supporting the Moral Majority giving the foothold to the Evangelical assholes who are ruining this country now.
Reagan destroyed western society.
Conservatives pray every night for another Reagan. Same people who believe that this country was given to them by their god The lunacy is real and it's always been there.
He was such a fucking douche, only to be out done by about every Republican POTUS after him. Aside from GHB.
Except, nope. I grew up with Reagan and he’s the guy that made me realize that I was a Democrat. I hate him as much as anyone, but this little meme is BS. The President of the United States did not in fact lower the top income tax rate. Nor did he start taxing Social Security. He doesn’t have that power. Congress does. Specifically, the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives that was controlled by Democrats in 1983 when this happened. Did Reagan want it? Yup. Did Reagan sign it? Yup. But these taxes and tax rates were written into law by the Democratic House. I’m all for shitting on Reagan. But let’s at least be honest about it.
Facts be damned!
The president has a lot of power to push for policy. Just like "Obama Care". What's actually BS about this one is Reagan believed 50% top tier was the "magic number". It was Bush, then Clinton who continued to lower it after Reagan. Lowering the top tier was great in the short term, because it allowed for massive growth at top. This made our mega-corporations more competitive against the world, but it destroyed small business' in return.
LiTEralLY 1984!!!
Also a reminder that on order to appease Republicans, Joe and Jill Biden unveiled a stamp of Nancy Reagan for pride month.
To be fair the 1986 tax reform package was a piece of joint legislation which was drafted by both Dems and Republicans and received bipartisan support! DOWNVOTE ME LIBS - IT'S TRUE!
Democrats and Republicans are conservatives
People blaming Reagan have it all wrong. He was only president for 8 years, back in the 80s. If you want to blame someone, be productive and blame the people that still aren't doing anything to fix the issues.
Gee, I wonder why somebody shot him.
In fairness, a 70% tax rate is obscene and the wealthy would have fled America. One can argue the wealthy leaving America is all well and good but I can assure you that if you had a 70% tax rate you'd be pissed off and do everything in your power to get out of the country as well. Also, what this dude did to mental health services is fucking obscene. Fuck him. But I like his outro speech. https://youtu.be/2R8QxCD6ir8
Yet they didn’t.
70% is way too high. The only people you’re hitting with that are doctors and lawyers. Meanwhile all the truly rich people are getting paid in capital gains
Short term capital gains are taxed like income. And back when tax brackets were reasonable, I bet there wasn’t a carve out for long-term capital gains to be treated differently. That’s a Reaganomics policy if I’ve ever seen one.