歡迎網友自由發表文章，但嚴禁發表有關相互人身攻擊言論、廣告文章、任何交易買賣 、或與本站主題不相關的文章。
請勿連續發表相同文章，關於討論區內的所有文章，本站皆擁有刪除及修改文章的權利。

回應討論主題

	回應主題：
	您的稱呼：
	您的性別：	先生 小姐
	您的職業：	資訊業 其它
	來自何方：	台北縣市 桃園縣市 新竹縣市 苗栗縣市 台中縣市 南投縣市 彰化縣市 嘉義縣市 台南縣市 高雄縣市 屏東縣市 宜蘭縣市 花蓮縣市 台東縣市 澎湖 金門 馬祖 中國大陸 國外
	電子信箱：
	您的首頁：
	留言筆色：
	討論內容：	Did you go to university? help to write a research paper I'm not sure how Reagan's policies could be called "supply side" in any meaningful sense of the term. Private saving collapsed. Budget deficits skyrocketed. Yes, inflation fell, but that was due to Paul Volcker, not Ronald Reagan. Reagan's fiscal policies were expansionary. In fact, if you add up the 8 budgets that Reagan submitted and compared them to the budgets proposed by the House Democrats, it turns out that Reagan's budgets were slightly larger. The one really good thing that Reagan did was to accept Sen. Bill Bradley's 1986 tax reform package. Now that was a supply side oriented tax bill because it reduced the kinds of tax distortions that Reagan's 1981 tax bill created (e.g., crazy depreciation allowances, subsidies for office buildings, sales of tax credits, etc.).
	留言內容：