Reaganomics refers to policy world of President Reagan, and Trumpconomics refers to the policy world of President Trump.
Comparing these two world views leads to a similarity and some differences, hence the question: Can you see the similarity and the differences between them?
What do you think?
Paul: Good question! Two great Republican presidents! Both helped the USA economy tremendously. Both cut taxes. Both lowered the unemployment rate.
Trumpconomics is the logical continuation of Reagonomics.
https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_6868.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QYAXplyZTc
https://rethinkingeconomicsnorge.com/2019/06/06/john-komlos-economists-mistakes-and-the-rise-of-trumpism/
Paul, thank you for your comments.
Yes, the similarity is that both are from the same party, but their nature or values are different, can you see those differences?
Since I am outside the box, I can see the differences easily
Good day Stephen, thank for your comment.
Think a little bit more carefully, actually you can understand the nature and structure of Trumpconomics if you look at Reaganomics in reverse.
Think of Reagan presidency as a normal democratic outcome pushing for a traditional republican version of advancing the best interest of the majority view; and think of Trump presidency as an extreme democratic outcome pushing for a Trump republican party version of advancing the best interest of the minority view.
Have a nice day!
Paul: No, I don't see the difference. Can you kindly explain in more detail the difference?
Paul, just 3 differences here, Reaganomics uses Adam Smith's free market world and thinking, Trumpconomics uses protectionism; Reaganomics uses free market and free democratic thinking as the corner stone of global peace and prosperity; Trumpconomics uses market protection to advance its agenda divisions and anti free democratic thinking rethoric; and Reaganomics was against bail outs and the debt, PERIOD; Trumpconomics is okay with bail outs and debt as this is needed to keep the minority view support. From here you can see there are more differences than these.
Have a nice day!
Concerning a static synopsis, your observations may be valid, if elaborated in the form of an analogy with 2 columns. My viewpoint is about the temporal framework of policies and politics. In this specific case, we have a policy (Reagan) before the Soviet collapse and one (Trump) 30 years after the systems change, i.e. global competition and fight for markets and employment. I see a dynamic and logical shift of policy-making as 'flexible response' to a new and emerging global economic reality. So, J.Komlos' arguments (see the 3 links above) find my support, in terms of 'historical interpretation of the current events'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Komlos
Stephen, simply reaganomics and trumpconomics are two different ideas of how to implement captilism....
Reaganomics uses Adam Smith's version of the rational responsible maximizer/the responsible invisible hand/the perfect maximizer....Free trade, global peace, freedom, inclusion, morality.... are essential.
Trumpconomics uses a rational irresponsible maximizer/the irresponsible invisible hand/the imperfect maximizer.....protection, global chaos, lack of freedom, exclusion, amorality,,,,are essential.
Whether you look at them from the static or dynamic point of view or general and component specific sustainability.
Capitalist thought is by its very nature dynamic. As MI. Tugan-Baranovsky opined: it is a human-made system (as we also detected in this debate) and it cannot die a natural death; it is up to human will and thought to elaborate alternative economic roads towards a next generation economic system. In synoptic terms, you are right. I am looking at this from the side of systems evolution, i.e. the adaptive logic of dynamic systems conformity and applying different 'capitalisms', in terms of 'temporal historical windows of political choice'.
I called it "first man-made market" in 2012
Complex and Man-made Markets: Are We Currently Approaching Sustainability in a Backward and More Chaotic Way in Terms of Economic Thinking?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281277199_Complex_and_Man-made_Markets_Are_We_Currently_Approaching_Sustainability_in_a_Backward_and_More_Chaotic_Way_in_Terms_of_Economic_Thinking
Stephen, paradigms shift to more sustainable forms(pure capitalism to green capitalism) or flip to opposite forms(red socialism to pure capitalism) leaving the old structure and their knowledge behind....
Trumpconomics comes from a flip in reaganomics thinking, a flip from free trade is good to free trade is bad....In the USA, the old GOP is for reaganomics, and the Trump GOP is for Trumpconomics, same party, different practicality based views...
The events do not astonsh me at all, with respect to your RG article.
It is the survival response of an 'ill patient', trying palliation.
I am recommending:
https://www.sociostudies.org/almanac/articles/m-_i-_tugan-baranovsky/
and his view of 'antagonistic capitalism'.
Also: https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Markets_without_Capitalism
A next generation economic system is already in the making, but illusions do play a great role in social life and politics.
Take it as the work of:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mephistopheles
Stephen, the abstract of my coming article to help with the understanding of extreme democratic outcomes and the world of trumpconomics is in my project:
https://www.researchgate.net/project/The-2016-shift-from-normal-liberal-democracy-to-extreme-liberal-democracy-The-USEXIT-case-Pointing-out-the-structure-of-Trumpconomics-its-meaning-and-its-expected-local-and-global-implications-bot
However, I am sharing it here too:
Abstract
The world of extreme democratic outcomes came in 2016 first in the UK with the unexpected win of the “yes” vote; and months later in the USA with the unexpected win of Donald Trump. This is a shift in the working democracy from normal to extreme structure as in extreme liberal democracies pushing the best interest of the minority view that surprisingly wins a majority rule based democratic outcome is the core goal. In other words, extreme democratic outcomes exist to push the best interest of the minority view, not the best interest of the majority as normal democratic outcomes are expected to do.
As extreme liberal democracies need targeted chaos first to come to exist, and later to persist, not surprisingly the UK and the USA has been under constant targeted chaos since 2016, which continues today. Hence, it can be said that both BREXIT and USEXIT are twins with the same extreme liberal democracy structure; and therefore, with the same extreme economic thinking mentality that is needed to support the implementation of the minority view that wins a democratic contest under targeted chaos. The author calls the environment of division in the UK just before and after the 2016 BREXIT vote the world of Brexconomics; and he calls the environment of division in the USA just before and after the 2016 USEXIT vote the world of Trumpconomics. Notice that the surface on top of which extreme forms of economic thinking like Brexconomics and Trumpconomics flourish is targeted chaos; and this economic thinking under chaos supports the actions of extreme democratic outcomes like BREXIT and USEXIT to advance the interest of the minority view that won the democratic contest.
Yet, despite the turmoil that normal liberal democratic forces and institutions in both the UK and the USA have been enduring ongoing since 2016 it seems democracy thinkers and political stakeholder affected in both countries did not see in 2016, and in my view, have not been able to see yet even now in 2019 the fundamentals of a systematic paradigm shift that has taken place: the system structure of extreme liberal democracy model in place now since 2016 is systematically the opposite as or fully opposite as that of the system structure that normal liberal democracy had before 2016; and therefore, an extreme democratic outcome does not work while inside normal liberal democracy rules and institutions; and to work the extreme democratic outcome has to twist them or destroy them to create its own extreme rules and extreme institutions. And without this basic understanding of paradigm shift it is difficult for those inside the normal liberal democracy box to see not just the long term danger in which normal democratic values and institutions are while under extreme minority rule, but also it is difficult to frame the way extreme liberal democracy can slowly advance its minority view agenda and use it to uncover ways to guide effective opposition. This paper focuses on the 2016 extreme case in the USA or USEXIT, but the structures and implications apply to 2016 BREXIT too. Among the goals of this article is to point out the structure of Trumpconomics, its meaning, and its expected local and global implications, both analytically and graphically.
Key words
Normal democratic outcome, extreme democratic outcome, BREXIT, USEXIT, normal liberal democracy, extreme liberal democracy, liberal democracy, paradigm shift, economics, Trumpconomics, Brexconomics, morality, amorality
Trying to understand and analyse political shifts is not an easy walk. It includes economic conjuncture, business interests and mass expectations, e.g. for employment. For me personally, neither Brexconomics nor Trumpconomics came with any surprise. The political response to societal phenomena, i.e. increasing global competition since 3 decades, is seldom a rational one.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Adler_(Ökonom) did publish ( 1904) a brilliant book: On the Significance of Illusions for Social Life and Politics (no English translation available).
Stephen, the point is that both in the UK and in the USA the normal democratic forces and the extreme democratic forces do not understand yet what happended in 2016 and what has been happenning to those countries normal democratic insititutions and values and democratic process because of the pardigm shift knowledge gaps I call "Brexconomics" around BREXIT and "Trumpconomics" around USEXIT....., those extreme ways of economic thinking are based on, not on science and consensus, but on the "gut theory", on the "bad luck theory", and so on...
The gut theory seems to be behind the latest tale of for example the push for Brexit with no deal in the UK or the immigrant issue in the USA.
If you look at BREXIT and USEXIT from inside the box...you can not see what I see from outside the box, and that is why I am sharing it so one day we understand what is going on inside to properly assess or analyse politics or development issues properly... Otherwise, the extreme democratic movement will take over the normal democratic movemenent without normal democratic forces haveing any idea of what had just happened in front of their eyes because of the targeted chaotic environment....
Politics everywhere is much more guided by gut theory than by prudent cognition, following the rule: perception is everything, reality is nothing, i.e. the perceptions are being 'manufactured'. I have to state again, no surprise for me. Old rivalries or antagonisms have become more intense and revived. Neither Brexconomics not Trumpconomics will be part of a next generation economic system, but the chosen road of 30 years of accumulated despair cannot last forever. The great systems change, signified by the engineered collapse of the Soviet system, did create a cut-throat global over-competition and the policy-option of choice is: national protectionism, which is fully against the propagated economic ideology before the 1989 events.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj1IIlqGeu8
Book The Dialectics of Modernity-Recognizing Globalization. 2014....
Gut theory is not consistent with science, and the point I make and made is "Trumpconomics" as opposed to ECONOMICS is not science based, which means it is not fact based....
You are right, that gut theory is the same type of thinking of non-democratic Tyranies/dictactorships....but USEXIT is an extreme democratic outcome in the USA, A DEMOCRACY....This gut theory brings EDO and non democratic authoritarian system in line, which may explain the foreign policy of the USA...
However, the paper and the question is about democracy and the shift within democracy....Keep that in mind....
Trumpconomics is not science based and gut theory is not consistent with science. Authoritarian capitalism is a political product of increased global economic over-competition. The ideological or mood shift within democratic countries (as per crowd voting) points to a negative nivellation via mass psychology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Opinion_(book)
Stephen, I like to keep things simple.
Under normal liberal democracy, we can have morality based capitalism and practicality based capitalism, all supposely different views of implementing the best interest of the majority view under majority rule based democracies implemented under stability. Under extreme liberal democracy there can only be amorality based capitalism as it needs permanent targeted chaos to persist...
You may find the ideas I shared in 2015 related to liberal democracy:
Moral and Practical Sustainability Gaps: Implications for the Current Liberal Development Model https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282331974_Moral_and_Practical_Sustainability_Gaps_Implications_for_the_Current_Liberal_Development_Model
Wish a good day to everyone!
Paul: What is your definition of "Liberal Democracy"?
What is your definition of "Capitalism"?
What is your definition of "morality"?
You seem to be using these terms loosely without a clear definition.
Paul, good day. Did you take a look at the article shared above?
Your questions tell me you are not familiar with material written by me, where the answer to your questions are in the body and/or operational concepts, perhaps my ideas do not yet gives you an incentive to read to see what is outside the box, which is fine
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lucio_Munoz2/research
If you do not have comments directly related to the question, Reaganomics vrs Trumpconomics: Can you see the similarity and the differences?
Then, Let.s leave it here Paul.
Have a nice day!
Paul: I see. You are only promoting your own article. No, I do not care to read your article because I think you are biased in your opinion. Try not to be so biased in your research.
Have a nice day!
Paul, there is something called academic discourse, if you read something that you disagree with or you are given some ideas about somehting you can not see and you do not agree with, a scientist says so and provides a defendable contra argument to advance the growth of knowledge or if a scientist agrees and would like to say he can do that and he can add more related thoughts if he/she wishes...
If you prove me wrong, I will accept it as I do not criticize ideas or call them biased if I can not academically prove or support that accertion.
There can not be academic discourse if you do not read or you are not familiar with what you consider lacking or biased or when you answer a question with another question ...
Now a polititian can say what you say "biased opinion" without reading or without knowing the academic facts...
Let's move on. I will leave it here
Thank you for commenting
And have a nice day.
Dear friends, those interested in ideas about Trumpconomics may find some good food for thoughts in the following unpublished article and I am sharing it here:
The 2016 shift from normal liberal democracy to extreme liberal democracy in the USA: Pointing out the structure of Trumpconomics, its meaning, and its expected local and global implications, both analytically and graphically
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334964196_The_2016_shift_from_normal_liberal_democracy_to_extreme_liberal_democracy_in_the_USA_Pointing_out_the_structure_of_Trumpconomics_its_meaning_and_its_expected_local_and_global_implications_both_analyti
Reaganomics = real and existent
Trumpconomics = imaginary & non-existent
Paul, that summarizes all, but to make the difference more catching I use tendency thinking,,,,,
Reaganomics tends towards full morality, Trumpconomics tends towards full amorality; and the reason is that reaganomics is a thinking under normal democratic outcomes and trumpconomics is a thinking under extreme democratic outcomes......
Thanks for your comment
Respectfully yours;
Lucio
The impulsiveness and shallowness of America's president threaten ... The real difference is that Trumponomics (unlike, say, Reaganomics)
Ref: https://www.economist.com/.../why-trumponomics-wont-make-america-gre
Dr Kamath Madhusudhana
Dear Madhusudhana, if you read the question and the comments on this question
Trumpconomics is not trumponomics.
Have a nice day
Lucio
Article related to TRUMPCONOMICS now published, you can take a look at it when you have time....
The 2016 shift from normal liberal democracy to extreme liberal democracy in the USA: Pointing out the structure of Trumpconomics, its meaning, and its expected local and global implications, both analytically and graphically
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335313547_The_2016_shift_from_normal_liberal_democracy_to_extreme_liberal_democracy_in_the_USA_Pointing_out_the_structure_of_Trumpconomics_its_meaning_and_its_expected_local_and_global_implications_both_analyti
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334964196_The_2016_shift_from_normal_liberal_democracy_to_extreme_liberal_democracy_in_the_USA_Pointing_out_the_structure_of_Trumpconomics_its_meaning_and_its_expected_local_and_global_implications_both_analyti
Whatever the labels, TRUMPCONOMICS is marked by Tariffs and Reaganomics is marked by Supply Side Policies (Laffer curve). That is how the layman will look at the two.
Chung, thanks for your comment...When you have time to read my article on Trumpconomics, do it and you may find some good food for thoughts....
I would generalize more, Trumpconomics is based on non-free market thinking and Reaganomics is based on free market thinking...
The outcome of Trumpconomics is chaos and a disjoint world. Reaganomics makes America great again.
The blood and aim of Trumpconomics is chaos and of reaganomics is stability.
Have a nice day Chung!.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Economics