June 8, 2004
WHAT DID IT BUY US OTHER THAN A UNIPOLAR WORLD AND TWENTY YEARS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH?
BUDGET BATTLES: The Reagan Years (Stan Collender, June 8, 2004, NationalJournal.com)
f all the budget things that happened while Reagan was president, the numbers have had the longest-lasting impact.Previously unimaginable annual deficits of first $100 billion and then $200 billion were reached and exceeded during the Reagan administration. The national debt held by the public more than doubled. The highest peacetime deficit as a percentage of GDP was reached in 1983, when it hit 6 percent.
Peacetime? Go to the back of the class. Posted by Orrin Judd at June 8, 2004 2:08 PM
There was a recession in '83.
Federal revenues were $ 17 billion less in '83 than in '82, and expenditures were up.
For instance, there were 22 million Americans on the Food Stamp Programme in '83, which at the time was a record number.
and GDP increased by over 4%
Posted by: at June 8, 2004 2:39 PMYeah, in '83 GDP grew by 2.3% after shrinking 1.9% in '82, so really it was just '83's tax revenues that shrank.
However, unemployment peaked nationwide in early '83, at 11.5%.
In some states, unemployment peaked late in '82.
Michigan had an official unemployment rate of 16.3% in Nov. '82; West Virginia had an official rate of 19.5% in Feb. '83.
Those are Great Depression numbers.
Michael:
Not even half and only in isolated cases, not nationwide
Posted by: oj at June 8, 2004 3:51 PMBob Brinker called 100% into the market on 8/13/82, pulled out 1/11/00.
Posted by: Sandy P at June 8, 2004 4:02 PMNo Hans Brinker he.
Posted by: oj at June 8, 2004 4:26 PMWhat, no rhetorical flourishes are allowed ?
What were "isolated cases" were states with official unemployment rates below 9%, between Oct. '82 and Apr. '83 - There were only fourteen of 'em.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at June 8, 2004 4:34 PMWhat was the national unemployment rate in 1983? What was it in 1933? And what % of the population was employed at each time.
The Recession of the early-80s was difficult. It was nothing like the Depression.
Posted by: oj at June 8, 2004 4:40 PMIn mid-May [of 2000], [Bob Brinker of 'Marketimer'] forecast a "bear market rally" and recommended playing it via the Nasdaq 100 Trust. The QQQs rallied sharply thereafter, but the call proved controversial . (Brinker later announced he'd no longer make short-term trading recommendations over the radio.)
Brinker [...] took a bigger stumble in mid-October, when he (again) forecast a "countertrend rally" and recommended buying the QQQs.
[He recommended that aggressive subscribers use up to 50% of their cash reserves for the trade, predicting gains in excess of 20% over a two- to four-month period from the QQQs' Oct. 12 closing low of $75.13.
The QQQs closed at $86.19 on Oct. 23 -- a near 15% gain from the Oct. 12 lows -- but have been in a near uninterrupted descent since...]
In the Jan. 8 issue, the newsletter writer stuck by the October call, forecasting up to 50% gains by the Nasdaq 100 from its Jan. 2 closing low of 2292. That translates into a target of just over $80 for the QQQs, which closed at $53.44 on Jan. 2, or nearly 30% below the original buy target of $75.13, the Oct. 12 closing low. Additionally, Brinker extended the time frame for the rally to three to six months from Jan. 8 vs. two to four months back in October.
Regarding hubris, Brinker's only mention of anything wrong with the October call was an acknowledgement his new price target is "slightly lower than [the] original."
None of that changes the fact Brinker deserves kudos for his "macro" call in January 2000, when he revised a 10-year recommendation that investors be 100% in equities, and suggested they raise as much as 60% cash.(Emphasis added).
By Aaron L. Task
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at June 8, 2004 5:02 PM