Trying to do a quickie internet search isn’t going to help you understand history, particularly in context. Reagan pushed block granting to states instead of giving them money for individual programs. Block grants always lead to a reduction in services, because they are a backdoor way to implement cuts to programs. AFDC-UP was cut by states, because of federal funding becoming block granted again as per Reagan. Since I was directly affected by the loss of the program in my state following block granting, and I know why my state cut the program — blocking granting by Reagan — I am not going to accept you saying that he isn’t responsible for breaking up my family. His policies absolutely were. That gives me a damn good reason not to like him, now doesn’t it?
UPDATE [next morning] I am less tired, so I decided to give you some websites that discuss just how Reagan cut all of these benefits for poor children, the disabled, the mentally ill, and other vulnerable people:
Chapter 2. Origins and Effects of Federal Block Grant Programs
The concept of consolidating federal assistance programs with similar or overlapping statutory purposes dates back to…
Here are excerpts from a piece on block grants and how they affected social services under Reagan.
As I never referred to median income, I am not impressed by your chart. I always said that wage stagnation occurred, especially relative to productivity. This is key because, the vast majority of the country is working class and makes a wage. They are considered part of the middle class, because people have never gotten away from a lower, middle and upper class triad. I said this problem with wage stagnation exploded in the 1980s and continued throughout the Conservative Era, which we have been in since 1980. It is this lower to mid middle class, wage earners, that has taken the hit since 1980 the most. Upper class wages have also dropped for the low end of that spectrum.
You can’t point to any Clinton or Obama did and say, “Look, things were worse then,” because the fact is they were both using conservative policies, hence the reason we have been in a Conservative Era since 1980. Let’s take Clinton’s conservative policies, for example, He passed welfare reform. He passed the crime bill leading to mass incarceration. He passed the Defense of Marriage Act. He implemented, “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” He passed a conservative trade policy, NAFTA. Of course, we know he passed Glass-Steagall.
Obama has been a Rockefeller Republican, passing budget bills marked by austerity, particularly cuts to social programs. The only exception was health care, and he chose a privatized system, which is a conservative plan, not a liberal one. Obama began to show liberalism in social issues, not economic ones.
The single thing you seem like you don’t understand is the conservative policies, from both Democrats and Republicans, have been in place since 1980. There is no evidence of liberal policy in what we see in economic policy. Each potentially liberal program has been altered, bastardized, watered down, or poorly implemented during the Conservative Era and every President from Reagan to the present has been guilty of using destructive social policy.
The matter of when a strike is legal or not has been determined by conservatives as well. They have consistently passed policies neutering unions and the ability of unions to use their collective power by doing things like preventing striking. So Reagan breaking that first air traffic controller strike was really just using conservative policies toward unions that have been put in place ever since. Conservatives attacked union strength with laws and regulations.