It’s Reagan in a rout.
No surprise. Reagan hired people who actually understood business and economics, and weren’t hostile to “the rich.”
3 thoughts on “Reagonomics Versus Obamanomics”
Comments are closed.
It’s Reagan in a rout.
No surprise. Reagan hired people who actually understood business and economics, and weren’t hostile to “the rich.”
Comments are closed.
Well, one might also say that Reagan had a fundamental understanding of business and knew who to hire.
Which leads to two lines of thinking regarding Obama, both of which are bad for business: either Obama does not have that fundamental understanding, all the while convinced that he does in fact have a solid foundation in business management, and as a result has no idea that the people he brought in are the worst possible policy makers for business growth.
The alternative, of course, being that Obama knows exactly what he wants to do and is deliberately destroying American businesses.
Obama does not have that fundamental understanding, all the while convinced that he does in fact have a solid foundation in business management, and as a result has no idea that the people he brought in are the worst possible policy makers for business growth.
Or, Obama is convinced that academics, lawyers and bureaucrats with no business experience can centrally manage an economy despite all historical evidence to the contrary. After all, they have published papers! and economic theories! to guide them. Who really needs business experience in the real world when you have theories and papers to guide the way?
Do you think the general population could figure out that electing academics is not a really good idea? If they figure the same thing for lawyers we might not have anybody to elect.
It’s time for a hockey mom. Or somebody with no fire in the belly. I might even consider somebody wearing a coon skin hat.
Anybody but the current idiot marxists.