FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Democrats Must Campaign to End Trickle-Down Economics

If America is ever going to reach her potential the Democratic Party must lead a progressive revolution that ultimately leads to Democratic control of the Presidency, both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court. This is because the Republican Party is deeply committed to trickle-down economics and we have roughly forty years of evidence that this economic approach simply does not work to create broad-based prosperity for most Americans.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, arguably the Republican Party’s chief cheerleader for this economic approach, recently demonstrated yet again his party’s commitment to trickle-down by crediting the tax cuts in the GOP tax bill for a secretary’s recent $1.50 weekly salary increase. This sad public relations disaster perfectly illustrates the ineffectiveness and insensitivity of this economic philosophy. The time is now right for Democrats to join forces with rational Republicans to finally end our nation’s long fascination with trickle-down economics.

After the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, the Reagan Administration and a majority in our Congress decided to try out  a form of laissez-faire economics called “supply side” by supporters and “trickle-down” by detractors, in an effort to rescue the nation from the grip of a serious recession that consisted of high unemployment and double digit inflation. This economic approach later known as “Reaganomics,” featured tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation of business. The theory behind this economic strategy is simple: if the government helps the wealthy create more wealth, the wealthy will in turn create enough good jobs to grow our economy to such a degree that it will create a state of economic bliss that will eventually eradicate our socioeconomic problems.

By the woefully inadequate traditional economic measures, such as the unemployment rate, job creation, and the inflation rate, Reaganomics was successful. Reagan’s approach ended the recession, led to the addition of millions of new jobs and the creation of wealth for thousands of Americans. Reagan’s economic approach was so politically successful that it altered the economic approach of not only the United States but much of the advanced world.  Bill Clinton’s Wall Street-friendly “new Democrat” approach was greatly influenced by Reaganomics. However, if we take a deeper look at our country since the beginning of the Reagan upward redistribution of wealth, this approach does not survive close scrutiny.

We know that most of the jobs created during Reagan’s swinging 80s and Clinton’s rocking 90s were low-paying service industry and temporary employment jobs from which workers could not earn a living. We know that wages for most Americans in the middle class have been compressed since we adopted the trickle-down economic approach and many of the manufacturing sector jobs that funded the middle class expansion of the 20th century either expired due to technological advancement or globalization in the form of cheaper foreign labor. Most importantly, we know that today America boasts the largest wealth and income inequality gap of any nation the world has ever known, a sure sign of a dysfunctional economy. Sadly, the traditional economic indicators our government reports to the media do not tell this story. This harsh reality has only recently seen the light of day.

In these embarrassingly ugly facts lie the root causes of virtually all of our socioeconomic problems: poverty, unemployment, underemployment, racial conflict, police misconduct and human-caused climate damage just to name a few. Despite the past popularity of the trickle-down approach, today most Americans appear to be moved by the real-world problems faced by the unfortunate souls stuck in the middle and lower classes. For many years, virtually all  polls that dared to ask Americans which direction our country is headed in have shown that most Americans believe that we are on the wrong track. Additionally, we know that most Americans do not support the recently passed GOP tax bill which despite President Trump’s populist promises is yet another blueprint for trickle-down economics. For most Americans, our government’s application of trickle-down economics has been a recipe for disaster and the public appears to know this.

Ahead of the impending mid-term congressional election and the 2020 presidential election, Democrats must embrace an economic platform designed to reverse the effects of Reaganomics and close the wealth and income inequality gap. Thanks to the atrocious effects of trickle-down economics this task will require considerably less political courage than it used to require. This is because many Americans no longer accept the untenable free market capitalism versus intervening government socialism choice sold to them so skillfully over the past few decades by the trickle-down supporting Republicans. Thanks to the hard work of progressive truth-tellers such as economists Robert Reich and Ha Joon Chang, Americans now know that there is no such thing as a free market economy devoid of government intervention. They accept the fact that the only issue that is open for serious debate is how much government intervention a well-functioning economy requires, the shape it takes and its effectiveness. If Democrats want to regain political relevance they should make ending wealth and income inequality the party’s central issue for the foreseeable future. Finally, Democrats should spend a significant amount of time seriously considering leveling measures, such as a national living wage, a universal basic income, regulation of the financial sector and large corporations and financial aid for small businesses.

Howard Gregory is a former municipal reporter for The Record of Bergen County, NJ. 

More articles by:
September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail