[GabrielBen]

This is something that economists have debated over for decades since. Stiglitz specifically attacks Reagan on that front. Milton Friedman defends it.

Reagan was the last president to make a deep impact change in how economics and politics relate. He was unique in the way he self-deprecated government, something that is truly rare for presidents. He would actively advocate the government was the problem not the solution, a famous line by Milton Friedman on his economic ideas.

To this day, I am awed at the air-traffic controller firing. I am from a country with a pervasive strike culture, to the point that even cops strike, and it has been unfathomable for any president , of any ideology, from dictatorships to democratic socialists, to fire a swath of strikers.

[dragonwriter]

> He was unique in the way he self-deprecated government,

This is false on two levels:

First, Reagan was not a monarch who shared personality with the State, so any deprecation of government he did was not self-deprecation

Second, he is not at all unique in that. Bush (43 more than 41) and Trump have done much the same, and even Clinton did it off and on.

[conanbatt]

What's 43 more than 41?

[dragonwriter]

The Bush that, like Reagan, talked down the (non-national-security, non-law-enforcement parts of) government.

That is, George W. Bush (the 43rd President) more than George H. W. Bush (the 41st).

[darawk]

> First, Reagan was not a monarch who shared personality with the State, so any deprecation of government he did was not self-deprecation

It is absolutely legitimate to characterize the president denigrating government as self-deprecating, splitting hairs about this is silly.

> Second, he is not at all unique in that. Bush (43 more than 41) and Trump have done much the same, and even Clinton did it off and on.

Reagan was more unique in his ability to actually do it, though. The others had much less impact.

[dragonwriter]

> It is absolutely legitimate to characterize the president denigrating government as self-deprecating

No, it's generally not (there may be specific cases where it is), especially when the President in question is selling himself as an ally of the people against government.

> Reagan was more unique in his ability to actually do it

Actually do what? If you mean literally denigrating the Government, no, Trump's done much more of that.

If you meant reducing it's role.. Reagan didn't even do that; he shifted the burden of paying for it, sure. But it was much bigger, more intrusive, and more expensive when he left office than when he entered.

[ryandrake]

I’m an 80’s kid, and don’t remember the specific rhetoric, but my question has always been: if you dont believe in an organization, why join it and try to ruin it for everyone? Why be president if you think government is bad?

I mean, I think the KKK is bad and should go away, but I’m not going to go try to be it’s leader.

[conanbatt]

OTOH, there is the adage that says that nobody that wants power should hold it - that the best leader is the reluctant one.

He has some magnificent quotes: contrary to the president "with the best words" he was actually a great public orator.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Ronald_Reagan_Government_Re...