Was Reagan such a great president?
 

Sorry, I meant to say RayGun. ;)

Why do people talk about him as if he was the greatest US president ever?

Did he actually achieve anything himself, or was it just an 8 year acting job with a global audience?

Hi Walrus

nope. grogan = walrus

He was a good actor!

but did he do any directing during his presidency?

poop

I think it's hard to figure out how a president did while he was in office. If you think about it, it's not what the president did in office but rather what the president before him did.

I think Reagan had balls.

There was this little thing called the cold war.......ahhh, never mind, your probably the type that would never remember or acknowledge it anyway

Hopelessly short memories (sigh)

but how did Reagan actually contribute to ending the cold war?

He went to Iceland and made a deal with that spotty headed guy :glugglug

Many people in the world, both Americans and others, felt that America was losing the Cold War in the 1970s with a weak economy, out of control inflation, a beaten down stock market, an unsuccessful military operation in Vietnam, Watergate, and an inability to prevent the OPEC embargo. These were economic, political, and military setbacks.

Under Reagan the prestige of the military was increased, the US economy and markets roared to life, and US political influence in the world increased.

Reagan was a great marketer and he wasted no time in pointing this out time and time again. His optimism was a great change form the general malaise of the 1970s.

As with all leaders, he probably gets too much credit for the good things that happened during his administration and too much blame for the bad.

it was a little more than that, though that was a large part.... He also forced the Soviets into bankruptcy trying to keep upwith us militarily, (threats of star-wars technology, etc....), and they could no longer afford to keep the vassel-states under their thunbs. they were forced to give up control of their empire and pull out of their occupation of Eastern Europe. Inevetabley, the whole soviet system started to crumble to pieces at that point.

so you're saying that one of his strongest achievements was bringing confidence to americans through positive messages?

and that helped give them the resilience as a nation to pull through and win the cold war?

Reagan borrowed an idea from Kennedy. The idea was that the USSR couldn't afford to spend on it's military what the US could. Reagan jacked the defense budget up and let the world know it.
In particular he pushed for new technologies that would be difficult for the bureaucratic Russian system to follow. The USSR increased its military budget in response. This was unsustainable and weakened the Soviet economy greatly.

Reagan also put incredible pressure on the entire Eastern European world increasing the power and scope of
Radio America broadcasts behind the Iron Curtain.

There were also, of course, many factors that contributed to the downfall of the USSR that Reagan was not responsible for including the rapid rise in computer technology that was difficult for a command control economy to keep pace with and leaders like Lach Walesa.

Its important to note that Reagan INTENDED to bring the Soviet Union down and did everything he could to make it happen including the above and playing the whole arm-the-guerillas game that the Soviets were playing in Latin America.

now this is a genuine question:

do you see any comparison with USSR defence spending and US spending now?

particularly as regards the ridiculous missile shield which no one can get to work, and even further down the line the Son Of Star Wars - where Bush seems to be picking up Reagan's old unfinished project?

That was in response to your question about why people speak of him as a great president. I'm not sure if I'd consider that an achievement. I'm saying that is the preception people have.

The thing about rating US presidents is that it is comparative. Most people when they compare the presidents of the past half century rate Reagan high by comparison with the other presidents.

now I won't give away too much here, but when Reagan was president let's just say I wasn't really paying attention to politics. ;)

I'm genuinly curious - he seems to be revered by some, and I was just wondering if his achievements match his memory at all.

I get the impression that style is an important part of american politics. Is that correct? If it is - that bothers me because that means people are not looking at politics as pragmatically as they should.

I get the impression people forget that politicians are *public servants*. And should always behave as such, or be thrown out of their job for having interests that conflict with their job description.

Two words on Reagan: Reaganomics. Alzheimer.

Not at all. This year, even with the war in Iraq, defense spending will reach only about 4% of total GDP. During the 1980s' the Soviet Military budget was as high as 17% of GDP.

The US spent much more on it's military during the 1960s at the height of the Cold War than today. It was even higher during World War II.

For the past decade, the US spent about as much on defense as most industrial nations relative to the size of their economy (about 3%). With the war in Iraq it's up to 4% making the US about the number 10 country in the world in military spending compared to size of economy.

The US spends so much on defense because it's economy is so much larger. To this day, Russia still spends more than 10% of its GDP on its military but the US economy is about 30x larger than Russias in US $ (Don't know what the difference in purchasing power parity is).

It wasn't even just that the USSR military budget was so high. It was that it was having to adapt all it's military technology to match that of the US. The US was able to use the successes of it's private industry and defense contractors to put microchips in missile guidance systems while the USSR was having to order such research and development in a sluggish control system ordered from Moscow.

Same as elsewhere, I don't think there's a quick and easy way to summarize how people think of politics in the US. Some follow the issues closely, some don't, some are real supporters of a political party, others aren't, some have one or a few issues which are overwhelmingly important to them, some don't. Some people loved Reagan and some people hated him. Some loved Clinton and some hated him.

Sure, style is part of it for some people. For example, there's an idea that a president needs to be "presidential".

I was never president.

No politician is worth a shit. Real leaders are not elected officials, they are people who set an example which inspires other people to greatness.

Politicians don't inspire people to do anything but get pissed off.

He used an old business trick. He upped the ante, outspent the competition til the competition couldn't afford to play anymore.

Sorta like how corporations outsource jobs here in the U.S. to foreign countries undermining the economic superstructure.

Oh, sounds like a case of the chickens coming home to roost.

I'm not pissed off. Why are you so angry, my friend? ;-)

I'm angry because when God created me, he didn't give me the ability to kill people just by thinking that I want them dead. No, instead I actually have to strangle them to death with my bare hands -- this takes upwards of 10 seconds. What a waste of my time.

What is it that you want to replace the political process with?

My dictatorial rule.

Line up in support of Buff: Supreme Imperator of Earth for life! Be a groupie, minion, footsoldier, or fan of the Great One!

I am 900% confident that 'USA is doomed' don`t give a shit about anything except being right, and being stubborn, but in the off chance you or anyone else want to read a bit from a great thinkers articles... here:

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/

Reagon was a GREAT president and did a whole lot for America, but since alot of anti-american people don`t want to believe that he did, they whine and cry about what he did, saying that it did nothing for the US. It is very well known that Clinton lived a legacy that was left from Reagon`s actions, but noone believes this because the media don`t tell it, and EVERYONE believes the media.

BTW - I am not saying that Walter Williams is 100% right on everything, he just does a damn good job of presenting the FACTS so that you can read them and make a decision.