Obama: Reagan or Hoover?
Notes from Underground
Adam Roberts
Issue date: 2/9/09 Section: Opinion
Early in his first term, Ronald Reagan faced the problem of runaway inflation, which had been hurting Americans for decades. He knew he could fix it by letting the Federal Reserve System make some adjustments to the credit market, but he also knew this move would result in a short-term spike in unemployment.??
Reagan made the right decision. For a few years, there was a recession and massive layoffs. Unions and liberals hated Reagan. His popularity numbers plummeted.
But, just as he predicted, the economy adjusted, and Reagan was vindicated. By taking the long-term view, Reagan left the country better than he found it.?
Fifty years before Reagan, a man named Herbert Hoover was president. We entered a global recession, and people panicked.
Hoover was presented with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which sought to preserve American jobs by cutting down trade with the rest of the world. He ignored the advice of economists, looked at the opinion polls and signed it. The result was the Great Depression and World War II.
President Barack Obama has a choice to make. Does he want to be Reagan or Hoover? Will he pander to the unions and the protectionists, or will he look at the broader picture, make the unpopular decision and do what's best for the country?
The latest stimulus bill to come out of Congress has a "Buy America" provision. It bars foreign competition for contracts with iron, steel and manufactured goods that will be used in infrastructure products. Congressional leaders know our trading partners will respond with their own "Buy European" or "Buy Canadian" plans. But they don't seem to care.
So all these same Democrats who criticized George W. Bush for "going it alone" in Iraq now want us to break international law and "go it alone" in the economy.?
As if that were even possible.
There is no "American economy" or "British economy" or "Chinese economy." There's one world economy.
This is a global recession. When Europeans lose jobs, we lose jobs. When Japanese have trouble selling goods, we have trouble selling goods. ??
Reagan made the right decision. For a few years, there was a recession and massive layoffs. Unions and liberals hated Reagan. His popularity numbers plummeted.
But, just as he predicted, the economy adjusted, and Reagan was vindicated. By taking the long-term view, Reagan left the country better than he found it.?
Fifty years before Reagan, a man named Herbert Hoover was president. We entered a global recession, and people panicked.
Hoover was presented with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which sought to preserve American jobs by cutting down trade with the rest of the world. He ignored the advice of economists, looked at the opinion polls and signed it. The result was the Great Depression and World War II.
President Barack Obama has a choice to make. Does he want to be Reagan or Hoover? Will he pander to the unions and the protectionists, or will he look at the broader picture, make the unpopular decision and do what's best for the country?
The latest stimulus bill to come out of Congress has a "Buy America" provision. It bars foreign competition for contracts with iron, steel and manufactured goods that will be used in infrastructure products. Congressional leaders know our trading partners will respond with their own "Buy European" or "Buy Canadian" plans. But they don't seem to care.
So all these same Democrats who criticized George W. Bush for "going it alone" in Iraq now want us to break international law and "go it alone" in the economy.?
As if that were even possible.
There is no "American economy" or "British economy" or "Chinese economy." There's one world economy.
This is a global recession. When Europeans lose jobs, we lose jobs. When Japanese have trouble selling goods, we have trouble selling goods. ??
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
Scott
posted 2/11/09 @ 12:04 PM CST
Adam, check your history. Reagan signed into law a major expansion of "Buy American" policies in 1982. If you favor giving international bureaucrats say over how we spend our own tax dollars, that's your call, but it's different than "protectionism. (Continued…)
Abel Tomlinson
posted 2/11/09 @ 1:57 PM CST
I just want to generally say that I think Reagan sucks economically and should not be praised in general. Perhaps he had some good moves on the things you mentioned, but it must be acknowledged that in his supposed "fiscal conservativism", he officially shifted America from being the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor nation, largely due to massive tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy and vast increase in military complex spending (just like dubya). (Continued…)
naffel
posted 2/11/09 @ 2:12 PM CST
"Currently, it boggles my mind that many conservatives are very worked up over the stimulus, but at the same time they support(ed) a $3-7 trillion Iraq war, and maintenance or expansion of a $1 trillion annual military/war budget, which year after year contributes massively to our ~$11 trillion national debt. (Continued…)
Jeremy
posted 2/11/09 @ 5:48 PM CST
Abel, while I agree with you and most of the rest of the green party that we should emulate communist Cuba, communist USSR of the 20th century, and the national socialist Germany of the 30s and 40s, I would like to correct you on some minor points in your opine. (Continued…)
Mark McCollum
posted 2/14/09 @ 12:39 PM CST
I need to address Abel's comments on here concerning economics. For one, he labels certain people and groups "conservatives" when he is actually addressing neoconservatives, in which there is nothing neo about them, nor conservative. (Continued…)
Post a Comment