Speedball Yoga

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19VtTeXeoE/

Duck your head in prayer and cover.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Lm9ndA2Em/

Yep

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1EJwtZ9sxe/

David Stockman sat down with a reporter and started telling the truth about the plan he had just spent a year selling to Congress.

Stockman was Ronald Reagan's budget director, the man tasked with turning "supply-side economics" into real numbers. For months he had stood beside the President explaining how deep tax cuts would unleash growth so powerful it would pay for itself. Congress bought it. The tax cuts passed.

Then Stockman talked to journalist William Greider for a series of long, unguarded interviews, and admitted something he had never said in public: the plan, he suggested, had never worked quite the way it was sold.

He told Greider it was "kind of hard to sell trickle down" on its own, so the administration wrapped it in supply-side language instead, dressed-up math for the same old idea. Inside the White House, he added, staffers barely understood the numbers they were pushing to the public.

The interview ran in The Atlantic in December 1981, and it detonated. Reagan reportedly summoned Stockman and threatened to fire him for it. Stockman kept his job. The deficit did not shrink. It nearly tripled over the decade that followed, and the growth that was supposed to erase it never fully arrived.

Defenders of Reaganomics still argue the confession has been taken out of context, that Stockman was describing early internal disagreements, not admitting fraud, and that the tax cuts and deregulation that followed did eventually help fuel a long expansion.

Critics counter that a sitting budget director calling his own signature policy a repackaged sales pitch is about as close to a confession as government ever produces, and that the debt left behind was the receipt.

Stockman resigned in 1985 and later wrote an entire book confirming what he'd told Greider, calling the numbers politically convenient rather than economically real.

So does Stockman's own doubt settle the argument about supply-side economics, or does a policy stand or fall on its results, regardless of whether the man selling it believed in it?

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19GkgpdE4q/