Ohhh how to compete with such condescending comments... Typical liberal tactics again, yawn.
Your graph is very impressive, but it does not come close to explaining the whole story. Reagan did not have cooperation with congress and if he would have been allowed to cut domestic and entitlement spending further, the budget would have been balanced in his second term and without the massive tax increases of Clinton.
Since you cut and paste from Wikipedia so well, here's a couple for you from the same page.
During the Reagan administration, the American economy went from a GDP growth of -0.3% in 1980 to 4.1% in 1988 (in constant 2005 dollars), which reduced the unemployment rate by 1.6%, from 7.1% in 1980 to 5.5% in 1988.
The inflation rate, 13.5% in 1980, fell to 4.1% in 1988.
This economic boom lasted 92 months without a recession, from November 1982 to July 1990, the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime and the second-longest period of sustained growth in U.S. history. The growth in the economy lasted more than twice as long as the average period of expansions since World War II.
Anyone can cherry pick stats to enforce their opinion, but most do it without posing with the brilliance of Einstien. LOL...
Now show me where your Obama's deficit (which makes Reagan's deficit look like a toll fee) that he has put on our backs did anything to improve the US economy. Give Scooter Walker a couple more years, especially after ZerObama is out of the way and you will see great results from Walker as well. Again, to the dismay of your union chief's and blind followers.
Now you can go back to Wikipedia a little further down the page and cut and paste the negative interpretations paragraph and act all smart again...
