Supply-side economics has proven disastrous
The recent commentary on NBC and CBS about Donald Trump’s acceptance speech was abominable. Both national news agencies did everything they could to defame and undercut everything Trump said. He must be giving voice to many unaddressed citizen concerns or he wouldn’t have such a big following.
Both commentators gave a favorable comparison to Ronald Reagan, whose former acceptance speech gave many quotes from FDR. Reagan reneged on most of those promises and his administration was the complete antithesis of FDR’s. Where was this critical scrutiny of his voodoo economics instead of enabling the entertainer-in-chief to subvert the institutional supply-side mess we’ve had ever since?
Is the nose-to-tail, 30-year plus consecutive administration preference given the Reagan/Kemp supply-side policy justified, based upon profits to the few and bolstered by the iconic status of the originator’s charismatic communication expertise, without considering supply-side’s chronic overall negative unsustainable results?
If our currency suddenly collapses because of the chronic systemic trillions in national deficits, with our current dependence on foreign manufacturing, who will come to our rescue? Japan? China? Do these commentators think this critical vulnerability should remain?
Louis L. Boehm