1436
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] quindraco@lemm.ee 44 points 10 months ago

Why is this an image of text? Makes it a lot harder to reply to, and you specifically asked for a reply.

Tripling the Debt

Usually, when someone accuses a POTUS of significantly impacting the national debt, they are lying, as Congress controls the country's wealth. This is no exception. For example, Reagan's repeal of the Windfall Profit Tax on Oil is usually used as part of the claim, but what he signed passed both the House and the Senate with veto-proof majorities; claiming he had anything significant to do with their passing is deeply disingenuous.

Dropped the income tax rate

Not going to bother with a link this time; it should be fundamental, basic common knowledge that a POTUS has no power over income tax rates. That's as Congressional as it gets. See statement above for a linked example of how Congress controls taxes.

Sold 500 missiles to Iran

This is an easy one; it was significantly more than 500.

Let 90k Americans die of AIDS

I have no idea what this is even about. Do you mean the Watkins Commission?

Claim about Reagan's impact on mental institutions and its impact on homelessness

The first half sounds truthy, and certainly vague enough to be impossible to "debunk", with the major caveat that, as with taxes, it's a near-certainty that Congress did the lion's share of this. The real meat on these bones is your claim that eroding the institutions led to a homelessness crisis (and tour subclaim that the crisis is still happening). I don't have time to debunk that, gotta get to work, but I wanted to acknowledge my failure to do so. It might be super true or super false, and either way I'm genuinely curious.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Congress did the lion’s share of this

It's almost like that's the way it typically works. The President sets the agenda, and has a reasonable amount of control on what gets presented to Congress.

[-] Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

You do realize Congress passes bills for the president to sign, the president negotiates with congress to get bills pass FOR the president to sign into law, so yes congress passes parts for the president to sign SO that congress and the president can get what they want.

10 monkeys in a room trying to order pizza is hard to do when you don't have a zoo keeper to tell them what there getting.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

I think the way you attempt to keep Congress and the Executive separate skirts the actual way politics work even if the governmental mechanisms supports your point. In other words, there's a reason why it's called Reganonics and the Regan tax cuts. In a world without parties, I would agree with you.

Second, you don't address budget deficient and the role in the national debit. Budgets are created by the executive and then approved by the legislature. You can see that between 1981 and 1989, the budgetary deficit was greatest during Republican rule.

Budgetary Surplus/Deficient between 1977 and 1997

And relative to economic output (GDP), it was the worst between 81 and 86. Deficit relative to GDP from 1977 to 1997

All of this is to say that the president matters in effecting the debt.

PS. Your link isn't to the Windfall Profit Tax on Oil but to Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act. I don't think they are the same thing, but correct me if I'm mistaken.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Presidential veto.

Any sources that he used it? If not. He's on the hook.

[-] kabe@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Thank you for your objective take on OP's claim, and for providing sources as well 👏

this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
1436 points (100.0% liked)

DebunkThis

1081 readers
1 users here now

Debunking pseudoscience, myths, and spurious hogwash since 2010.

We are an evidence-based Reddit/Lemmy community dedicated to taking an objective look at questionable theories, dodgy news sources, bold-faced claims, and suspicious studies.

Community Rules:

Posting

Title formatting on all posts should be "Debunk This: [main claim]"

Example: "Debunk This: Chemicals in the water are turning the frogs gay."

All posts must include at least one source and one to three specific claims to be debunked, so commenters know exactly what to investigate.

Example: "According to this YouTube video, dihydrogen monoxide turns amphibians homosexual. Is this true? Also, did Albert Einstein really claim this?"

NSFW/NSFL content is not allowed.

Commenting

Always try to back up your comments with linked sources. Just saying "this is untrue" isn't all that helpful without facts to support it.

Standard community rules apply regarding spam, self-promotion, personal attacks and hate speech, etc.

Links

Suggested Fediverse Communities

RFK Jr. Watch @lemm.ee - Discuss misinformation being spread by antivaxxer politician, Robert F Kennedy Jr.
Skeptic @lemmy.world - Discuss pseudoscience, quackery, and bald-faced BS
Skeptic @kbin.social - The above, just on Kbin
Science Communication @mander.xyz - Discuss science literacy and media reporting

Useful Resources

Common examples of misleading graphs - How to spot dodgy infographics
Metabunk.org - a message board dedicated to debunking popular conspiracies
Media Bias / Fact Check - Great resource for current news fact checking + checking a source's political bias
Science Based Medicine - A scientific look at current issues and controversies
Deplatform Disease - A medical blog that specifically counters anti-COVID-vaccine claims
Respectful Insolence - David Gorsky's blog on antivax shenanigans, politics, and pseudoscience

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS