Ronald Reagan was a better President than Barack Obama

Before I start, I'd like to clarify that I'm not just some liberal Obama fanboy, nor do I hate Reagan and all Republicans. I've also been on vacation and haven't been able to respond to you since 8 hours before this is due, so I can't go into as much detail. Argument 1: Economic Policy Differences As my opponent has mentioned, there was indeed a catastrophic economic collapse starting from the late 70's that carried over into the early 80's, causing massive unemployment levels. In fact, the economy was so bad that it continued to collapse 1 1/2 years into his presidency before the upturn. "Reaganomics" did give the country economic growth and prosperity for a little while, but by looking at his policies, we see that their side effects resulted in a catastrophic situation for the US economy. (1) Reagan gave up to 25% tax cuts for the rich, later to increase to 40%, with the belief that the rich would invest more and boost the economy, which is the same program later Republicans have tried with no results. It did start up the economy, but it caused a extraordinary widening wealth gap between the poor and the rich, since the rich had more money and were empowered by it. The result is today, where massive lobbying and the wealthy's control of Wall Street have helped lead to inaction in Congress and the 2008 financial crisis. The Congressional Budget office that since Reagan took office, income levels has risen "275% for the top 1%, 65% for the next 19%, just under 40% for the next 60%, and 18% for the bottom 20 percent." (2,5) That is a sharp turn from pre-1980, when income growth was more balanced and the middle class was growing strongly. This is the reason for the financial instability that plagues so many today. Another result was the massive deficit that resulted not only from the massive tax breaks but also from the relentless military spending that Reagan took, up to 456 billion in a single peacetime year, to protect against the USSR that was disintegrating under its own rigidness and ideological failures. The debt rose by 200%, compared to the 33% increase during Obama's term so far, (which includes interest payments of some $1.2 trillion from Bush's debts) (3)It was Reagan who set the debt for the massive debt spiral we're stuck in. During his terms, the deficit rose by $132 billion. In fact, the rising debt stabilized only after Clinton started to TAX the rich, which created a surplus. The fundamental lesson- tax the rich, to keep the debt down. His policies of 'trickle-down economics' have failed. Republicans nowadays have tried using it, to little effect. The poverty levels that slowly decreased under Reagan shot up again with HW Bush and his continuation of Reaganomics. (4) Along with his ferocious attack on unions and deregulation of banks, the power of the country became more and more concentrated in the hands of the bankers and the rich, whose actions helped contribute to the Wall Street crashes. Even Warren Buffett has said that economic inequality is dangerous and consumer demand is necessary for growth. That's how economies grow. Reagan never once raised the minimum wage, but did plenty to help the wealthy. (4,5) In conclusion, while Reaganomics may have helped America in the short-term, in the long-term it sent us down the economic ladder into trouble, and it really only benefited the rich after the 80's ended. As for Obama, remember that the economy collapsed just a few months before he came to office. Without that $1 trillion he put in as stimulus, the economy would have likely collapsed, something Reagan might have dismissed as unnecessary government interference. But without government interference and some level of control, there is little to stop economic tragedy or disaster that some federal rules may have prevented. However, there's not much that he can do, even if he wanted to do so. Reagan was able to harness all the Republican party's power, and as he grew in popularity he got more support in Congress. The republican opposition won't let Obama get out a word. They've passed a record number of rejections on Obama's plans, and what does come out is too watered down. While I understand that Republicans have their concerns, with little legislation being passed in Congress there is no way to help the American people. Many democrats have caused the same problems as well. For this, I will grant that Reagan was a skilled speaker who knew how to get his way, but the political climate is different. Now, Obama has to deal with the Tea Party which abhors him, and the GOP is now inclined to side with the Tea Party in this in fear of losing votes to them. Obama is put between a rock and a hard place. Even with his number of executive actions (still far less than Reagan), if he tries to get anything done he is slandered and attacked. Congress had an 8% approval rating for a reason- the right is blocking all legislative effort. That isn't to say that Obama doesn't have some flaws with his policymaking, but I refuse to compare him to Reagan on matters of the effect of his laws because most of his projects don't come into fruition. If he actually was able to pass his laws, then the situation might be different. He doesn't get the opportunity. He can't be compared to Reagan in that light. He wants to raise the minimum wage to $9, just so that people can actually start to have financial security. But that won't be passed, because it's against On the other hand, it should be mentioned that while his recovery is slow, it doesn't come with the "added bonuses" of Reaganomics. 2. Foreign Policy (source 6) The media kicked up a fuss for Bush and it's doing the same for Obama. With constant whining about Benghazi, the wars in the Middle East, the Ukraine crisis and the new threat in Iraq, the administration has been criticized for inaction. The truth is, though, there isn't much he can do- and that's the wisest idea. The essential problem in Afghanistan is that if we don't keep troops there it'll be overrun, but by keeping them there we waste money. It's a quagmire. With House Republicans wanting to give military support to Ukraine, it is essential to realize how stupid that sounds. Putin will seize the chance to show that we are interfering militarily in the realm, and conditions would deteriorate, possibly to war, and we can't invade Russia. Air strikes would accomplish nothing of importance either way. We offered our country's diplomatic support to Ukraine and chastised Russia severely, but that's all we can honestly do. As for Iraq, the Bush administration has only itself to blame. Obama took all the troops out because the people wanted him to. It's like Afghanistan in that it's largely hopeless. Our reconstruction programs were costly failures. We left them in religious strife and political instability. Nothing more. As for Benghazi, we forget that 13 attacks on embassies took place during the Bush administration, and I don't see Fox News crying about that. It was a tragedy, but we can't blame Obama. What was he supposed to expect? The Egyptian muslim brotherhood was incompetent, but certainly not radicals or terrorists. We've never pretended to be friends with Pakistan, and in fact we distrust them, leading separate operations and not informing them about bin Laden. As for Reagan's excellent foreign policy record... USSR- Reagan pursued enormous amounts of military spending on a country who even he admitted had its "last pages are... being written." Despite the myth that this ended the Cold War, the Soviet economy was already in ruins, and Gorbachev's policies didn't solve them but simply caused nationalism and anger to tear the soviet bloc apart. South Africa- Unlike Congress and other civilized countries which condoned and sanctioned the vicious regime there, Reagan instead called for constructive engagement, put very few sanctions, and even recognized the government. Only after 1985, when he was denounced by Congress for this, did he change his mind. Indonesia- Reagan supplied arms to the brutal Indonesian government even after it illegally invaded East Timor. Guatemala- Even though it was illegal by US law, Reagan supplied arms to the Contras, a guerilla band that used deadly scorched earth tactics, and even helped sabotage their enemy. Afghanistan- The whole reason the Taliban exists as a fighting force is because of Reagan. He was friendly with them, and offered plenty of US weaponry, which would later be used against us when we invaded them. The fact is that whatever the circumstances, he helped to create the Taliban as it is, and the result has been a nightmare for the US and for the Afghanis and Pakistanis. To conclude, Reagan was no better than Obama for the reasons stated above. Sources: 1.(http://www.ushistory.org....) 2. http://www.examiner.com... states 3. www.businessinsider.com 4. http://consortiumnews.com... 5. http://reagan.procon.org... 6. http://www.sparknotes.com...