Poverty and inequality have increased sharply in the US during that period. It's wonderful that the global average is improving, but that doesn't mean you can just ignore problems affecting hundreds of millions of people.
Do you have numbers for that?
> that doesn't mean you can just ignore problems affecting hundreds of millions of people
That's just a straw man.
> That's just a straw man.
That's not a straw man. Here's a straw man: On an article about US economic policy, Beat claimed that '80s US economic policy had failed. You disputed that based on global economic outcomes since then, refuting an argument that no one had actually made.
I edited it out because I find it, for the most part, irrelevant. I'd rather live in a world where everyone is better off to different extents than one where everyone is equally poor and miserable, as in post-reform vs. pre-reform China. Do you prefer the latter?
> It seems clear enough, therefore, that the financial policies of the last 40 years have at best not helped, and have made some things worse.
Non sequitur.
> That's not a straw man.
Weighing the costs and benefits by analyzing the bigger picture is not "ignoring problems affecting hundreds of millions of people". That's just plain stupid.
> On an article about US economic policy...
Proof that you didn't read the article, because it discusses other countries and international trade.
> Beat claimed that '80s US economic policy had failed
Where did beat say "US" in their comment?