Only thing that ever “trickled down” from the Raygun years was this Duopoly’s collusion to kill the middle class and piss down all our backs.
Average household net worth: $915,000 in U.S.A. in July 2020. Total household net worth: $118.955 Trillion (Flow of Funds, Fed. Reserve, p.2), total households 130 million. About 40% of households own very little. In fact 54% report owning less than $5,000 in “liquid assets” states the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau report “Financial Well-Being in America”, p.80, 2017. And about 70% or more living paycheck to paycheck. The system is broken, we need a revolution. The system is broken, it can’t be emphasized too much. Workers have to sit on corporate boards, they need the PRO Act to increase their bargaining power. Mostly we need public awareness, which will spark deep radical changes. I write a blog, Economics Without Greed, part two, but other places carry the same message, Washington Center for Equitable Growth, Inequality (dot) org, the Poor People’s Campaign. Bernie Sanders. Even Senators Gillibrand, Warren and others. We have to pull the wax out of Biden’s ears and all other deniers.
I believe they called the shantytowns of displaced and unemployed people “Hoovervilles”.
There’s a lot in a name, after all - history remembers.
Exactly. If you haven’t realized trickle down is a farce by now you have been in a cloud somewhere.
The fact that the buying power of the dollar has dissipated, and without overt inflation, is a good hint as well.
Bitch McConnell got his big tax cut for the rich by owning the legislature. If the dems win out in Georgia Biden can tax the rich if so inclined.
It is time for either a revolution, or give a new political party an opportunity. People’s Progressive Party, PPP. It has a good revolutionary sound to it, eh; PPP. The empire is crumbling so why not try a new Party?
It’s working exactly as planned: The Fat Cats piss on the Middle Class, and It trickles down onto the Working Poor . . .
That might not be the optimum name – Instead of the Fat-Cats’ Pee-Pee, you’ll swim in the People’s Pee-Pee. Great!
(See my comment above.)
Very, very true. But Joan, lets hold Biden’s feet to the fire! Are their any progressives that really believe that BS?
I agree, but we have to make that an actual thing. That means protesting HIM, Pelosi amd the rest. It means directly confronting them, leading rent strikes, work stoppages. Challenging him will often mean scaring the hell out of the capitalists propping him up. It has to start turning into concrete things.
The trouble is, though they wouldn’t say it directly, there are probably as many Democrats as Repubs who believe in what Jim Hightower used to call, “Tinkle-down” economics. The D’s are just in the closet about it.
Whether at national, state, or local government level, most of the D’s I’ve observed readily support taxpayer-subsidies for the rich- under the pretext of “job creation” or other economic benefits to the regular folk… without ever any accounting for how many of the existing population got jobs, or any other cost-benefit analysis.
So while Reagan was the face of trickle down economics, it has been a bipartisan con game run for decades.
Well, you’ve pretty well described the nature of this 21st century unDemocratic Party but there’s no reason to despair for the Party’s internal progressive cavalry, the dynamic and incredibly effective Progressive Wing of the Party, is riding to the rescue even as we speak. Senator Sanders and AOC and Ro and those other “progressive powerhouses” we’ve read so much about right here on CD, they’ll be turning things around any day now, overwhelming all those corrupt neo-liberals in the Party with the power of their progressive rhetoric. And thank goodness that’s so doable because it certainly ain’t gonna be accomplished with their votes. What with legendary progressive powerhouse Nina Turner joining the progressive revolution from within the ranks, it’s all over for the neo-liberals. Oh, joy, our beloved party is back and happy days are here again!
They were not only not ignorant of the facts, they’ve actually been working towards the collapse that is occurring for the last 50 years, even though they expected it to happen within the first five years they started pushing this agenda, …damn progressives keep messing things up and forcing them to extend their timelines.
As many of the University of Chicago Club have said, they want the entire US to be like Rio or other massively unequal cities. Extreme wealth for a very few, and favelas for the rest of us. Or…just like Texas and Mississippi, with a few very wealthy people running it all and the rest of us living in Reaganvilles(or Friedmanvilles). I can’t find the reference now, but there is one county in Alabama that is so poor it has an endemic hookworm problem. And little healthcare.
Tax the rich to death. And advertise them as being uncool. Instead of entertainment worshiping then, let’s have programs showing them as they really are. The dysfunctional families, the drug issues, the abuse of servants, how they simply drop trash on the floor expecting others to pick it up…the whole dreadful reality of The Rich…
You sound like you’ve read George Lakoff’s work on framing; the little book Don’t Think of an Elephant, for example. The Republicans are excellent at deceiving and manipulating with names; Democrats, maybe not able to clear their minds enough of their own deception, are hopeless at it.
Most of what you said is true. But having someone like Nina Turner in government is great, regardless. I think the left in that party has been weak, and doesn’t do politics well. But, I also do think that people like AOC aren’t grifters. They just need someone with a different makeup who isn’t afraid to do things she and others seem afraid to do. But, does that by itself make the Democrats better? Marginally if people like AOC only replace Crowley types a few times each cycle. We need a far more rapid growth.
Having said that, change doesn’t happen because of any of these politicians. Social movements are what change things, and those social movements have to put tons of pressure on the system and they have to scare the hell out of the capitalists. Threaten their power, challenge their power and wealth, and you will see worthless hack politicians change pretty fast. Fact is, most of those in power really don’t have a philosophy. They are empty, corrupt shills. They would change positions on issues rapidly if they felt challenged.
Beyond all of that though, screw MA voters for supporting Neal of Morse. What the hell is wrong with people?
Trakar, I think you’ve got it: it ISN’T any sort of “misunderstanding” at all, but a WITTING DECEPTION, whose ONLY output is an increased tolerance for the ABUSES OF THE WEALTHY. Drawn on a napkin to start with, Trickle Down was only, ever, a tool of deception. The fact that “we” have so solidly eaten it up, is their glee, and our credible downfall if we took their so-called “word” for it.
So much economic thinking of the last 40 years is backwards or upside/down. Instead of a Minimum Wage, for example, we need a Maximum Wage of say 30 times higher than a company’s average worker. This would include executive wages, stock options, and all other forms of compensation to make it more difficult to “game” the system. An alternative could be lowering the tax burden of companies who keep a low ratio between the highest incomes and lowest.
This idea is from my article, “Extreme Inequality in Politics, Healthcare and Economics,” at ~https://mHealthTalk.com/inequality/.
- Is this article/journal/study peer reviewed?
- If the rich get extra $ due to a tax break, then what do the spend it on that doesn’t benefit the less wealthy?
- The study seems to infer that the more you tax the rich, the better the not-rich become. So if we tax the rich 100%, that’s the absolute best scenario for the not-rich, right?
- Such articles always seem to refer to “tax them more” or use other relative language without establishing a baseline. Isn’t the baseline important?
Amen, even adamantly Progressive politicians must be led by their constituents, it isn’t that they don’t have the will to operate boldly on their own, it is that they only have as much legislative power as the mass movements which force their representatives to actually represent their will.