Daniel Mitchell's "slam-dunk" case that Reaganomics beats Obamanomics is a brick. He finds a chart that shows that the 1983 recovery was faster and stronger than the 2010 recovery, and concludes "as you can see, Reaganomics is much better than Obamanomics." Here's the evidence:
Well look, we can all omit variables to make a chart mean whatever we want it to mean. Here's my slamdunk case for why tax cuts always ruin economies:
In the year after President Reagan signed TEFRA (the "largest peacetime tax increase in American history") in September 1982, the economy exploded and unemployment decreased dramatically. In the four quarters after Obama signed hundreds of billions of dollars in tax rebates for Americans under Making Work Pay, the economy sputtered and unemployment went up. I did it! I just proved that tax hikes always spur economic growth, and tax rebates are bad for the economy. Here's my evidence:
But here come the pesky variables to ruin everybody's fun.
1. Monetary Policy. The Federal Reserve helped create the early 80s recession by jacking interest rates up from 9 to 19 percent in 1981. It helped end the recession by slashing them back into the mid8s in early 1983. In the 2008 recession, the Federal Reserve had less ammunition. It was a financial calamity, the Federal Reserve has cut the federal funds rate to practically zero, and the economy is still crawling on its belly.