Reaganomics Vs. New Deal This

The Great Depression required restructuring of the economy in order to address the causes and effects of that crisis. It was more successful when some of the ill-conceived elements of the New Deal were discarded, but the measures undertaken paved the way for the strong growth of the latter 20th century. Reaganomics itself does not promote strong growth, but it worked in the short run, and some of Reagans other policies ultimately promoted strong growth.

Thus, it is difficult to determine which of the two worked better. Had Reaganomics been attempted in the Great Depression it may have failed because it was not a wholesale restructuring of the economy. The New Deal would have been largely redundant in Reagans time and in any event most of its policy prescriptions would not have addressed the specific problems that Reagan faced. Neither policy can be said to have definitively improved its respective economy, in part because neither was implemented in ideal form. Aspects contributed to success, but other aspects either were not implemented, counterbalanced success or were ancillary to the real drivers of recovery.

Works Cited:

Aiginger, K. (2010). The Great Recession vs. The Great Depression: Stylized facts on siblings that were given different foster parents. Economics e-Journal. Retrieved November 25, 2010 from

Bandyk, M. (2008). Did the New Deal work? USA Today. Retrieved November 25, 2010 from

Brokaw, T. & Thompson, a. (2004). Ronald Reagans economic legacy. NBC Universal. Retrieved November 25, 2010 from

Cole, H. & Ohanian, L. (2009). How government prolonged the Depression. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 25, 2010 from

Edsforth, R. (2000). The New Deal: Americas response to the Great Depression. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Rothbard, M. (2004). The myths.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *