Hey now don't be trashing The MAN - Ronald Wilson Reagan! LOL,  seriously, Reagan knew that "Reaganomics" wasn't a great model, he did  what he did because he felt it was the right thing to do and he was  right. Under Carter, the "grinning jackass from Georgia" as my Dad  called him, the US Military had suffered badly and this from a President  that was a US Navy officer educated at Annapolis. Look at the situation  Reagan found when he took office. The Cold War was still in play and  our Military was underfunded. He felt we needed a strong Military given  the issues of the day. So he pumped up the Military as a strong  deterrent to the former Soviet Union and it prompted the Soviets with  their failed economic Socialist model to attempt the impossible ..  compete with a free market model. It couldn't, as Reagan knew, and it  played a large part in the fall of the Soviet Union. The Marxist  Socialist doctrine as an economic model has failed every time. Look no  further than Cuba as proof of that. Or Venezuela. 
Now look at  Bill Clinton. Under his Presidency the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed.  That Act's sole purpose was to prevent Wall Street from being Banks,  basically. This was a direct result of the 1929 stock market crash where  without such regulation Wall Street was playing both sides in effect,  just like they did after Clinton unleashed them to repeat their mistakes  of greed in the 1920's. What happened? Pretty much the same thing.  Clinton can say he didn't actually have any role in the bad decisions  Wall Street later made, like bundling all those bad mortgage loans as  investments. Whatever, Bill, you let the foxes back into the hen house  and guess what? They ate the chickens. Real shocker there eh? 
So  i disagree with Stevie that Clinton had nothing to do with the current  problems, he did. As for Obama, he also had a lot to do with it, largely  by filling his staff with competing lines of economic thinkers, which  he claimed was part of how Abraham Lincoln put together his cabinet. It  might have worked for Lincoln during the civil war but it certainly  hasn't worked for Obama. His economic models are just what you'd expect,  a confusing contradictory mess. And by the way Obama, Lincoln did that  in order to re-unite the country 
not run the economy. 
Now  let's look at George Bush's role is this. While i contend Clinton set  the wheels in motion for a lot of the current economic mess by repealing  the Glass-Steagall Act, Bush did nothing to rein in Wall Street either.  The bailout bullshit began under Bush. Could you argue it was too late  for anything else by then? Possibly, but i don't agree with this  so-called "too big to fail" stuff. The very nature of Capitalism is that  good businesses 
succeed and bad businesses 
fail.  what would have happened if the government had let AIG or Lehman  Brothers fail? Certainly there would have been some harsh fallout in the  short term, perhaps another Great Depression? Maybe, but we're already  in the midst of the "Great Recession" aren't we? We did survive the  Great Depression so who's to say we 
had to bail out these failed  businesses just to avoid another one? I think we would be better off  letting them fail in the long run, just as the Capitalist model  dictates. Why? Because it shows businesses that they don't need to pay  for their bad decisions, that the government will bail them out. With  OUR tax money. What's their motivation to run their companies properly  now? None. 
Now let's discuss this "Rich vs. Poor" thing. What would you prefer? A model that does 
not allow  one person to work hard and become successful so that another person is  not poor, comparatively? That model is called Socialism. Forget all  this Egalitarianism shit. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia on that ..
Economic Egalitarianism in economics is a state of economic affairs in which 
equality of outcome has been manufactured for all the participants of a society. An early example of economic egalitarianism is 
Xu Xing, a scholar of the Chinese philosophy of 
Agriculturalism, who supported the 
fixing of prices,  in which all similar goods and services, regardless of differences in  quality and demand, are set at exactly the same, unchanging price.
[7]
Do  i sometimes rail against those who are far richer than me? yep. Do i  sometimes get so frustrated i'd like to "take all their money and give  it to the people?" Yep. Would I? Nope. Why? Because i believe in the  promise of Capitalism in that you can achieve whatever you work hard  for, unlike Socialism which would prevent that. I can't stand people who  whine like babies and make excuses on why they aren't rich. Maybe some  people are just smarter and more hard working than others. That's life  people. The value of human life is equal, the value of people's work  ethic and intelligence isn't. 
An example is my brother. Is he as smart as me? yeah, 
maybe smarter.  Is he as successful as me? No, because he's a lazy bum. He never  learned that hard work is one of keys of success, he figured, wrongly,  that he'd get a free ride in life. He didn't. He never finished college,  i did, and i did it the hard way by putting myself thru college on my  own. Both of us blew a chance at an education paid for by our Dad, who  also put himself thru college and law school the hard way, on his own.  And guess what? He reaped the rewards from it and was a successful  businessman. Imagine that! At his peak he would have been in the 98.5  percentile of income based on current income rankings. My brother  flunked out of college because he thought it would be just like high  school where they basically shuffle you thru and he didn't put in the 
hard work it  required. I flunked out the first time because i had no clear goal at  18 of what i wanted to do, and without that i struggled to do well the  first time. my brother also mistook my Dad's success and confused us  with the Rockefellers and thought there's be huge trust funds to live  on. My Dad was successful, but not 
that successful. And he never promised to leave anything to us. It was 
his money  anyway. Even when we do get what's left of my Dad's estate it won't  make me uber wealthy anyway. It'll be a nice windfall but it won't be  nearly enough to buy a mansion in Preston Hollow, either. So where do i  and my brother rank today? My brother is between 15th to 18th  percentile, i'm in the lower part of the top 10 percent, about the 85th  percentile based on 2005 data. To him, i might as well be Bill Gates  lol. And he resents it to no end. But all he has to do is look in the  mirror to see the 
real reason he's poor, at 51 years old. Go figure.