The rich get rich and the poor get poorer - it’s the GOP economy, stupid
Posted on Friday, June 15, 2012 at 09:22 AM
RSS 
Recent Posts
- Daily Mail unloads on 'drunken young' Paddys with booze-baiting rant - British tabloid continues its anti Irish attitude
- Marco Rubio: 'If immigration bill gives Cubans immigration rights, it kills the bill. I'm done' - VIDEO
- Diaspora should work both ways - time for global Irish to vote
- Ireland needs a new James Joyce - new voice of the Irish people is on the way
- Fox News Lou Dobbs panel: selfish working mothers are destroying the natural order and America
Archives
![]() | |
| President Ronald Reagan |
Once upon a time, well just 40 years ago actually, if you worked hard all your life you'd probably come out better than you started. It wasn't just a line they fed to lure you here.
It was true -- you stood a good chance of making real progress with your life. In those days, which were your parents’ days, a more tightly regulated economy lifted all boats, not just the big yachts at the top.
There used to be a very strong middle class in America who were the envy of the world, and their unprecedented purchasing power drove the dynamo of the American century.
So what happened? Well, first the Ronald Reagan administration happened.
That era saw the mass changeover from productivity to finance, it saw America's rich find more effective ways to grow their own wealth. Instead of producing goods they switched over to playing the markets, private gain trumped public obligation, special interests trumped the common good.
Since Reagan's inauguration in 1980 we've now developed a financial inequality that's so extreme it's actually worse now than any time since the late 1920s (in the years just prior to the Great Depression).
But while ordinary people are struggling to get by our top corporations are enjoying the highest corporate profit margins in the history of this nation, combined with one of the highest unemployment rates in history.
Employers are also paying the lowest wages in history as a percent of the economy. According to an analysis by Moody’s Analytics this week, profitability in non-financial firms surged in recent quarters to fifteen percent, a level not seen since the late 1960's.
So President Obama was correct last week when he said our private sector is doing fine. There's simply no question about that. It's the best of times for the lucky few and the worst of times for the many.
Giving more tax breaks to corporations that are already stuffed with cash is not going to lead to change. It's the lack of demand that's really hammering our economy and impeding investment.
Some conservatives like to tell you that American jobs only exist because “wealth creators” create them. That's nonsense.
Jobs only exist because there are customers that can afford to buy products. But they can't do that if they don't have the cash.
If you're one of the many people who visited a store last week and hesitated to make a purchase whilst you calculated if you could afford it, you participated in a dangerous cycle. If you turned around and walked out things just got worse.
If instead you're one of those people who rarely have to calculate whether you can afford something, well good for you. The problem is there aren't enough of you to save the rest us from the tightening vice. The crumbs from your table aren't going to be enough.
Of course there are different realities in America. It's why I love livening in New York. It's a democratic city that affords you instructive glimpses into the gulf between rich and poor every time you walk a city block.
It's instructive to walk down to Tribeca, the real seat of the city's wealth now, where you can enter the Harry Potter alternate reality of the financial district. Doormen in white gloves will sweep you into the most expensive looking apartment buildings on the planet.
Upscale lifestyle facilities abound. Yachts bigger than small villages are anchored to the nearby Hudson with immediate access to leafy outdoor restaurants.
If there's a recession on, they haven't got the memo in Tribeca. They live, most of them, in that other America, in Mitt Romney's America, and it's still morning in that America. If you want the next four years to look like the last ten you should vote for him.
To clarify, I don't mind rich people. I don't think rich people are the problem individually. I think that the political party that panders exclusively to them and works against everyone else in the nation is the problem.
I’m not the only one who thinks this. For example David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget who wrote a prescient New York Times op-ed piece in 2010, agrees.
America's increasingly partisan politics is destroying not just the economy and capitalism, but the American dream he wrote. "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation's public debt will soon reach $18 trillion,” he warned.
That kind of debt cries out for “austerity and sacrifice,” he wrote. Instead, Romney and the GOP insist that the nation's richest taxpayers should be spared even a three-percentage-point rate tax increase.
"Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts," Stockman wrote, "in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses too."
No longer. From 2002 to 2006 the top 1% of Americans received two-thirds of the gain in national income, while the bottom 90% got only 12%.
This growing wealth gap is not the market's fault. It's the fault of decades of bad economic Republican policy. It seems unfathomable that we are being asked to embrace it for yet another presidential cycle.
82 Comments
15 - 82 | See all comments
kaydog1 | Jul 03, 2012, 06:18 PM EDT
I guess I should add to my last post that Mr Obama is nothing if not consistent. I would therefore expect his approaches to problems and the consequent results to be very much the same over the NEXT 4 yrs as they have been in the preceding 3.5 years. So, anyone who is happy with how they personally are doing in our current 'Obamaconomy' should likely vote their pocketbook to continue with Obama at the helm. Anyone who feels that their personal prospects are doing poorly, however, should consider that what you have is what you will get,and consider voting for a different Captain for our economy. It's as simple as that folks - ARE YOU BETTER OFF NOW THAN YOU WERE IN JAN 2009? Decide how you'd like it to be and vote accordingly.
Report abuse
kaydog1 | Jul 03, 2012, 11:21 AM EDT
HOLLABACKGURL, to quote Cahir's article, "If you want the next four years to look like the last ten, you should vote for him (Mitt Romney)" - somehow "FORGETTING" that three and a half of those "last ten years" involved Obama's big Socialist butt sitting in the Oval Office. My point was that Cahir tries to pretend Obama's 3.5 yrs weren't even there. You, at least, are crediting Obama for our present magnificent economic status of 50% of all last year's college graduates being unemployed, 30% underemployed, and 38% of ALL 18 - 19 year olds being UNEMPLOYED. Further, in 2013, all the Federal Income Tax brackets will jump a level, so a 25% bracket will pay 28%, and a 28% will pay 31%, and so on (but it's "not a tax increase") as part of Obamacare, and the Soc Sec tax will start to again collect 2% more on wages (but it's "not a tax increase"), and the Obamacare Tax upheld by the Supreme Court AS A TAX is being re-classified by Obama as 'not-a-tax', 'cause Obama don't raise no taxes! Yet MY Federal Income taxes will go up at least 5%, and the Capital Gains Tax rate will jump from 15% to whatever an individual's ordinary rate is, so business investing is about to take a big dive. one more hit to the economy... Actually, I don't see Obama saving ANY capitalism, except for maybe CRONY CAPITALISM, double-talking his way into taking Billions MORE from the already-fragile economy so that he can pass it on to his friends in municipal unions and phony 'green industries'. So, credit where it's due, HOLLABACK! - Thanks, Obama!!!
Report abuse
hollabackgurl | Jun 30, 2012, 11:43 AM EDT
I don't agree kaydog1. Obama had to save capitalism from the ravages of the financial crisis, from Wall Street's casino crash, and from tax cuts to billionaires that they didn't need and our economy couldn't afford. I credit Obama from protecting us from the financial crash those idiots created for us, and for curbing their activities with the introduction of financial controls that protect us from their worst excesses.
Report abuse
kaydog1 | Jun 28, 2012, 10:05 AM EDT
Cahir, I will not for a moment contest that we are daily raped by the corporations and plutocrats controlling our lives. That said, I note once AGAIN the standard Leftist refusal to accept ANY responsibility for the problem. CBO just this month released figures that show that US households lost 40% of their net worth since 2009 -40%!!! - 2009 was the 1st of the 2 yrs that Obama had full control of House, Senate, Presidency - yet Leftists hand NONE of the responsibility to Obama. It is a shame that Obama will apparantly have absolutely no legacy after his only term in office, but apparantly, everything that has happened was done by Reagan and Bush, before they left office. Poor, stupid old Obama, he's just a tool of the smart Republicans, just another Leftist victim...
Report abuse
seanomelb | Jun 20, 2012, 08:45 PM EDT
Only some of it Briano, maybe you will need a donation if Romney gains power.He wants to take your pittance and give it to us rich guys.
Report abuse
BrianO | Jun 20, 2012, 09:29 AM EDT
Seano how can you be a millionaire, I was sure you donated your wealth by now.
Report abuse
seanomelb | Jun 19, 2012, 07:30 PM EDT
Briano I'm in good company I my self am a self made millionaire and a liberal to boot.You Briano can go on voting for the good old GOP who are sending the middle class into debt so their billionaire friends can become richer,some people can be fooled all of the time.People like you Briano!!
Report abuse
BrianO | Jun 19, 2012, 08:36 AM EDT
KatieMurphy, you show the logic that seanomelb loves, and good job for doing well, I'm sure your father would be proud of you.
Report abuse
KatieMurphy | Jun 19, 2012, 12:09 AM EDT
CAhir almost talks directly about my parents. My father worked faithfully for meager wages, selling for a large distributor of bicicles tvs etc.................
his best year was 1984, he made $18000.
..............
Then the distributor went out of business, and my dad took over a couple of lines (ignoring the 10 0thers he had sold) as an independent rep......... The following 5 years (until his health failed at age 80, he only worked part time and made $25000. Basically the owner made more money off him then he paid my dad for 40 years..........YOu may ask why Dad didnt leave earlier and go into business for himself, but its impossible to tell you the economic and emotional trauma he suffered during the great depression............BTW I and my husband are quite wealthy. Why - a string of Good luck and Gods grace , a college education , a chance meeting, even a minor pvt airplane accident were instrumental in us both working for Intel corp for decades and they paid us handsomely -(the then president was Dr. Grove, a holocaust survivor saved by good xtians in Hungary..............So I've changed from repub to democrat, given away $100,000 in college scholarship money to good needy kids........I was purely lucky (and darn near worked myself to death) so I have lots of empathy for the average ex- middle class American. Taken to the cleaners by the repub mostly wall street banks.
BTw in the latest issue of the Nation, it describes how eg Bof America has put all its risky crazy derivatives into the same corporate shell as the depositors money. They just lost $2 billion in the same kind of derivative scam that brought us Bush Jrs disaster. And if they go under - guess who pays the tab - too big to fail, the FDIC and the taxpayers................
time we bust up these conglomerates. a worse scene could result in what
Report abuse
seanomelb | Jun 18, 2012, 07:48 PM EDT
Briano you're welcome to your illogical one sided point of view.
Report abuse
BrianO | Jun 18, 2012, 03:49 PM EDT
Red branch, you can make out who compiled the statistics shown. www.faireconomy.org the have a particular leaning.
Report abuse
BulldogMania | Jun 18, 2012, 02:21 PM EDT
LMAO! More pathetic nonsense by the radical left. This article is filled with so much CRAP...I'll just say two words...JIMMY CARTER...enough said.
Report abuse
Scrivner | Jun 18, 2012, 02:18 PM EDT
I remember the time just before Reagan--stagflation, the misery index and perpetual engergy crises. The Reagan turnaround was painful, but a revised & simplified tax code, tightened monetary policy and emphasis on a better future brought about a sustained period of prosperity that lasted thru the Clinton administration. You should also note the correlation of who controled Congress, too.
Report abuse
RedBranch | Jun 18, 2012, 02:07 PM EDT
I would have liked to see a red 1% bar for the first graph, if only to counter Twain's critique of statistics.
Report abuse
82 Comments


Report abuse