Ronald Reagan was a better President than Barack Obama

My final arguments; My source did mention that the military build-up helped destroy the USSR economy. It had less to do with the US, however, and more to do with the war in Afghanistan. To quote you, "the US supported the terrorist groups against the USSR". That's my point- we supported terrorists. These are largely the same terrorists that we've spent trillions on and lost American lives to for 13 years. If we hadn't supported the terrorists, then the Communists in Afghanistan would have likely died out with the Soviet collapse. Our plan to help the Taliban backfired horribly. Of course the Soviet economy couldn't outproduce us, capitalism is the superior economic system as history has stated. Despite what the INF treaty states, our goal was less about democracy and more in stopping Communism. As Harvard lecturer Dov Ronen explained, the collapse of the USSR "only proved that the implementation of the Marxist idea failed in the Soviet empire, and the collapse of economies there did not lead to entrenchment of democracy but to the exercise of self-determination" [1] Gorbachev is right- we don't know what would have happened. The turning point also came during the Reagan era, but not because of him. The USSR was already doomed by 1981. As for the Contra affair- I can only give you the Brown Univ. and a historically commended PBS documentary analysis. Despite a law passed in '84 specifically prohibiting CIA operations in Nicaragua, Reagan told NS adviser Robert MacFarlane that "I want you to do whatever you have to do to help these people keep body and soul together." [2] He was fully ready to break the law. Reagan also gave personal approval to MacFarlane when asked for permission when asked for permission to trade arms to Iranian terrorists for hostages, (though Reagan's intentions were to bring all hostages home). This violated both the embargo on Iran and his promise never to deal with terrorists. [2] [3] Speaking of dealing with terrorists, that's what you're suggesting we do with ISIS. They are terrorists, do you honestly think that they'll abide by their word? In any case, if we deal with them, that means we acknowledge them as a legitimate government, with a right to the lands they have conquered, ignoring all their horrific war crimes and atrocities. I'm not keen on that, and I don't think Obama or anyone else is. Yugoslavia was a horrific example, not a good one. Yugoslavia broke up in 1992, not 2003. The Balkans is secure now because the UN has intervened and forcibly brought down the conflict. But during those 8-years there was a war that killed 140K and displaced 4 million. That solution won't work in Iraq. Again the problem with the Nazism reference. As I said before, most of the genocide and horror of the USSR was over by the 1950s. The Nazi regime murdered to its last breath. The German economy lasted 12 years because the Nazis lasted 12 years. Their economic woes came from their insane and expensive war of conquest, which would have been worse had they not horrifically used millions of slaves. [4] The Nazis and Soviets had completely different economies and ideologies, hence Hitler's aggressive hatred of communism. I should also mention that the Soviet economy was relatively successful until 1970, but collapsed on heavy military spending and stagnation. [5] I am horrified by your argument that the disgusting Apartheid regime would be better than the black majority having a government that IT ACTUALLY WANTED. Mandela coming to power did not create instability. I should also mention that Thatcher was rather racist, looking down on Indians and Asians. [6] [7] All the better if the Apartheid regime was destabilized and toppled- because when it was, it proved to the world that democracy could function in S. Africa. Stability doesn't counteract racism. Economy: As for Obamacare costing an "insane amount of money", it doesn't. It will reduce our deficit by $200 billion in the next ten years, and $1 trillion in 20 years. It's also reducing the healthcare spending growth trend considerably. [8] [9] When remembering that this will also increase the quality of healthcare and dramatically reduce wastage, on top of providing affordable healthcare, it sounds like a very nice proposition. Your physician shortage argument is nonsense. Yes, primary care physicians have been declining for the past 30 years. The solution is simple- use nurse practitioners, who more often than not are fully qualified for it. In using this, the shortage can be cut almost in half [10] Regulation increased, but it wasn't regulated in the right places, nor was it enough. People do not 'unanimously' agree, that's an exaggeration, though a lot of people will. The Fed's main problem was not looking carefully enough at the mortgage loopholes and easy credits that dominated the early 2000s. Our minimum wage is a part of this debate. Reagan didn't increase it even once, although most other (successful) countries do that. Why? Because people need a living wage if we're going to be able to build up a middle class. You don't build a middle class from the top down, you do it from the bottom and middle. Unless that is done, then our income inequality will rise, the vast majority of people won't have enough money, and the economy will founder, along with decreased quality of life. Obama recognizes this, and that is why he is so keen on developing the middle class, by increasing the minimum wage and helping the poor. Final Words and Conclusion: I have proven my assertions in the above arguments that Reagan is not superior to Obama, because Reagan's foreign policy was disastrous (Iran-Contra scandal, S. Africa, Grenada) , his policy against the USSR was costly and unhelpful, his economic policies only truly helped the rich and drove income inequality to enormous levels, he did little to help the middle class and he set the trend for current, failing Republican policies. On the other hand, Obama has tried to help the middle class and has made positive strides in healthcare, made smarter foreign policy choices, but is being attacked again and again by a GOP who prevents his policies from helping America as much as they could. I want to thank my opponent for an excellent debate, which I thoroughly enjoyed. Sources: 1. Ronen, Dov. "End the Campaign." . NY Times, 30 Apr. 2013. Web. 20 July 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com...;. 2. "Iran-Contra Affair." . PBS, n.d. Web. 20 July 2014. <http://www.pbs.org...;. 3. "Understanding the Iran-Contra Affair." . Brown University, n.d. Web. 20 July 2014. <http://www.brown.edu...;. 4. Liu, Larry . "Economy of Nazi Germany, 1933-45." . Academia.edu, 1 Oct. 2013. Web. 20 July 2014. <http://www.academia.edu...;. 5. "Soviet Economic System." . HowStuffWorks, n.d. Web. 20 July 2014. . 6. Watt, Nicholas . "Margaret Thatcher held "unabashedly racist views"." The Guardian 10 Apr. 2013: n. pag. Print. 7. Martin, Rachel. "South Africa Through The Eyes Of A Post-Apartheid Generation." . NPR, 4 May 2014. Web. 20 July 2014. <http://www.npr.org...;. 8. "Deficit Reducing HealthCare Reform." . White House.gov, n.d. Web. 20 July 2014. <http://www.whitehouse.gov...;. 9. "Cost of Obamacare." . Obamacare Facts, n.d. Web. 20 July 2014. < http://obamacarefacts.com...;. 10. Mahar, Maggie. "Obamacare isn't creating a doctor shortage, it's solving it." The Guardian 28 Jan. 2014: n. pag. Print.