why do republicans claim that reagan was a good president?
especially considering the stock market crashed when reagan was president known as black monday.
which proves that reaganomics trickle down has never worked .
so i say yes let those tax cuts and breaks for the wealthy expire .
giving the wealthy all the tax breaks never helped our economy as far back as reagan.
and i do remember those reagan years as if it were yesterday .
i have never been able to figure that out because --

- reagan presided over the wholesale dismantling of our industrial infrastructure for short term profits for the very wealthy, who were already making record profits, and to destroy the unions. millions of people were thrown out of work, and the remaining workers were told to work twice as hard. our productivity increased +45%, but wages for working people remained frozen. we were encouraged to borrow money until household debt was nearly 100% of gdp. personal bankruptcies went up +610%. incarcerations went up +355%. anti-depressants went up +305%. health care costs went up +78%. the ratio of ceo pay to worker pay went up +649%.

- "trickle-down" worked exactly as intended, to benefit the wealthiest at the expense of working class americans. it increased economic inequality and shifted most of america's wealth to the top.

- republicans then went after education – doing away with civics classes and making education another brass ring that could be grasped only by accumulating massive debt. debt served to create a society of indentured servants who may think they work for xyz company, but really work for the bank.

- one of the last pieces of this recipe for oligarchy was to deregulate the media. reagan did away with media ownership laws as well as the fairness doctrine, which made propagandists like rush limbaugh possible. the airwaves were then flooded with pro-corporate, anti-worker republican propaganda to keep the people stupid enough to vote republican.

- inequality grew by leaps and bounds under reagan. 

- as governor, reagan oversaw the largest tax increase in californian history. democratic governor jerry brown cut back the tax rate when he came to office. 
 
- as president, reagan expanded the federal government by about 90%. reagan allowed the welfare state to enlarge and the military budget to explode causing monstrous budget deficits and government growth that dwarfs government growth under clinton, even when clinton had a democratic congress. the number of federal workers rose 61,000 under reagan, as opposed to clinton who cut 373,000 jobs.

 - reagan also bombed libya, put the "war" in war on drugs, allowed the continuation of selective service registration (despite his campaign promise to end it), helped the khmer rouge terrorize thailand, imposed brutal trade sanctions on nicaragua, funded the murderous brutal contras, sold missiles to iran, gave assistance to saddam hussein and osama bin laden, and lied to the american people. 

 - the foreign policy of ronald reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of gwb. he was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way.

 - in 1988, reagan’s last year in office, outlays as a percent of gdp were running at 21.3% with a deficit of 3.1% of gdp. the budget deficit over reagan’s eight years averaged 4.2% and ran as high as 6.0% in 1983. (in 1980, the last year of jimmy carter’s presidency, government outlays were running at 21.7% of gdp and the budget deficit was 2.7% of gdp.) 

- reagan raised taxes twice in 1982, and then raised them again in 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987. in spite of all those tax hikes, reagan didn't grow his way out of the deficits caused by his 1981 tax cut.

- it took an eighth tax hike from george bush sr. in 1989, a ninth in 1990, a tenth from bill clinton in 1993, and then another economic boom to erase reagan’s deficit. sure, a strong economy helped, but without all those tax increases the deficit would never have disappeared.

-reagan increased unemployment from 7% to 11% in his first three years. the unemployment rate did not get better until his fourth year.

- reagan taxed the wealthy at 50%. (governing to the right of reagan, obama taxes the wealthy at 35%.)

- ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. he hated the poor. he hated gays. he hated leftists. he hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. he never met a social program he didn't scorn. he never met an american in need he wanted to help. his response to the aids epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. 

- then there was iran-contra, the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the reagan legacy. look it up. rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded reagan at all times. 

##
make enough money to leave the rat race and pursue whatever you want in life. 

for those still chasing prestige, many go into general management (c-suite), politics (mitt romney), or philanthropy (schwarzman). a lot of old school pe deal makers end up opening their own shops to have greater control over their lifestyle. 

private equity is still a grind with long hours. at some point, you make “enough” to stop caring about prestige. electoral college. trump lost the popular vote. out votes don’t matter because of the electoral college. he should have never won in the first place and the only way we can get him out is if the blue voter turnout is high enough to swing the electoral vote in favor of biden absolutely not. the proposal to abolish the electoral college is the horrid, but depressingly predictable, symptom of a populist age.populism is not a schematic philosophy but is rather an attitude toward culture and politics characterized by the veritable worship of "the common man," a distrust of elites, a wariness toward complexity and - significantly - a deep dislike of established institutions. (called these days, "the establishment" or "the swamp.") in this, then, the movement to abolish the electoral college is part of a larger current running through the society.indeed, at the same time that there have been calls to abolish the electoral college, there have also been calls to abolish the u. s. senate, or abolish the filibuster, to pack the supreme court (or limit the terms of justices or make other changes), to raise the voting age to 16 and in some cases to allow illegal immigrants to vote. what all of these have in common is that they take a torch to established institutions, particularly those institutions that put a break on the pure expression of the popular will.indeed, this is not just a phenomenon on the democratic side of the aisle at the moment. the republicans have been vocal in their attacks on the "media" - as if that were a single entity - and on silicon valley - which in the popular mode of the hour has discriminated and oppressed conservatives, it is alleged.most of all, republican who are feigning outrage over senator warren's call to abolish the electoral college are forgetting that one donald j. trump has advocated its abolition as well - at least until it helped him win. mr. trump - like all good populists - is no slave to consistency, after all.at any rate, abolition of the electoral college would be a horrid idea. it would effectively disenfranchise huge swaths of the country as both parties would camp out in california, new york, texas, florida and maybe ohio, leaving the rest of the country to itself. this would also very likely set the stage for the rise of regional parties, with all that would entail for the balkanization of the nation's politics.moreover, if the nation enjoyed the spectacle of the 2000 election, it should be prepared. in that year, the fight was over florida's electoral votes which confined the battle - as a legal and political matter - to the vote in one or two counties in that state. turn the battle into a nationwide popular vote and instantly the fight would move to the count in every close vote in every closely fought district across the country.there is irony in this. 2000 was effectively resolved by a ruling in the supreme court - that bastion of elitist judges and lawyers. abolish the electoral college and close votes across the country will invariably end up in the courts as a routine matter.the electoral college has served the nation well for over 200 years and such long established institutions deserve deference. their endurance certainly suggesting that they have worked as well as anything works in an imperfect world.wise societies realize that. which certainly suggests something about the state of american society. yes, it is their fault. they run a precarious and structurally bad business. every 8-9 years or so since deregulation's, something has happened to bankrupt the whole group. still, they continue to overcompete and empire-build by leveling up and buying new planes to grow on top of each other. there's a reason that they trade for mid single digit p/e before the virus. because investors are skeptical that the businesses can survive through a cycle. ceos that bought back stock made a bad investment and that's their fault. there is already enough evidence to either require another election in some states (which there may not be time for) or require the state party convention (which are often controlled by republicans) to make a decision due to the issues laid out in the legal arguments. trump's team has very valid points and evidence to back up those points. legal process is necessary for legitimacy, but any judge who strictly interprets the law will side with trump’s team. due to the media’s propaganda campaign, i’m sure many judges would be concerned about the ramifications of the legal outcome, but ultimately they have to do their job as arbiters of the law. so trump should win his lawsuits even if the supreme court has to make the final decision. republicans are likely, but not guaranteed to be loyal to their party. trump will likely win in the end... either way, as of now no votes have been certified. if we examine those states that have generally finished their vote counts and have no legal contest at the moment then the current electoral vote count would be 227 biden vs 229 trump. so technically trump is currently winning even if the mainstream media wants to brainwash you into believing something else. what are you talking about religious people get mocked frequently and looked down upon by those who either believe differently or don't believe at all. this is why we shouldn't have religious people in power, they have a tendency to make it hard on the other religions. shorting has been pretty horrible this year imo. so firstly you have the broad pro-equity factors you mentioned e.g. rotation into etfs, which makes it tough to be short anything in the first place. then you have other factors that have made stock-picking increasingly difficult on the short side, such as the vast quantities of pe dry powder on the sidelines that have bought out some heavily shorted stocks this year.
the sector exposure stuff has been bad too. e.g. consumer staples which has been a fundamental short for a while (slowing growth, saturation in ems, peak margins). i am far more concerned with people soft on crime yet want to make criminals out of legal gun owners. i am more concerned about people who think any loser should be allowed in america. if anyone has hid out for so many years they should be allowed to stayand if they breed a litter of kids on our tax dollars they should stay. What I never get is that schools that perform well get more funding which gives good incentives to teachers etc... but worse performing schools get less funding continuing the cycle ignorance, poor education, instilled with that from parents, fear of someone who is different, fear of things they don't understand, fear of change, hostility towards people who they perceive are doing better than them, irrational fear of people they believe are trying to take their jobs or worsen their life situation in some way. i could list another dozen. and everybody is a keyboard warrior on social media saying things anonymously they'd never have the guts to say to someone's face.often times, it's a combination but irrational fear and insecurity is usually present. one of the best jokes i've heard that exposes the hypocrisy of racism, fear of immgrants, foreigners etc. is:"if you think immigrants are all criminals, rapists and killers and you think immigrants are all coming to take your jobs, what the hell do you do for a living?"