Trickle down is a failure

[Tom Joad]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert...usaolp00000592

Of course, Republicans and apologists for Wall Street dispute that assumption. They argue that the economy is not a so-called "zero sum game" -- that the best way to improve the standard of living or ordinary Americans is to grow the economy. And they say that the best way to do that is to allow the wealthy to control more and more of the nation's wealth, since they invest that wealth in new productive enterprises that create more and more new jobs.

That premise, of course, is the essence of "trickle-down economics." The problem is that we know empirically that "trickle-down economics" doesn't work. Economic growth does not necessarily increase the incomes of ordinary Americans.

In fact, over the last 35 years we've had lots of economic growth. Over that period per capita income has increased by a whopping 77% and made America wealthier per capita that any society in the history of the world. That should mean the average American is 77% better off today then he or she was three and a half decades ago. Problem is, we aren't. Instead, the real buying power of the wages of ordinary Americans has barely increased at all. Instead, all of that growth had been siphoned off to the top one percent -- and most to the top .01%. That is not a theory. It is a documented fact.

more

[donquixote99]

I checked the math--I get per capita adjusted net income up 80.4% from 1977 to 2012. That is in constant dollars--the inflation not counted.

Now maybe a reasonable expectation of income distribution would have income for the masses up less than 80%. But how much should John Q.Public expect as a part of the growth pie? If your answer is 'more than nothing,' you're talking about how things used to be, back in the last century. Real household income has been essentially flat since 1999, while real GDP per capita, despite the Great Recession downturn, has shown great growth.

Here's a graph that shows the whole thing. (You'll have to blow it up to read it, but it's just what we're talking about. Graph only goes through 2009, so the 'recovery' of GDP isn't on it.) Found it at http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...mericans/?_r=0



This is solid data, from the Census Bureau. Trickle-down dried up entirely in the year 2000. The economy just is not working for the benefit of the people, that's all.

[piece-itpete]

Anyone who thinks we DON'T have more spending cash is crazy! Look around - how much crap do you have? How much did we used to have?

Pete

[donquixote99]

Individuals can gain as they advance their careers, but we're talking the average of everyone together. What you see in your living room doesn't trump what the Census Bureau finds when it adds up everybody's 'living rooms.'

[piece-itpete]

Do you know any poor folks DQ? I'm just asking.

Back when I lived in the hood a heat wave brought everyone outside, and cars were not rare but, hard to come by? Now the streets are almost deserted in a heatwave - many folks have AC - and there are far more cars.

And the average new home SF is way, way more nationwide.

The bad news is, there doesn't seem to be government cheese anymore and good Ohio grown sensi is gone. Plus computer controlled cars. There's always a down side

Pete

[piece-itpete]

Btw DQ I don't mean to be so contrary all the time, I just disagree with all yous on just about everything!

Maybe agree on a drink. On me.

Pete

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Trickle down

You mean Piss On.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Do you know any poor folks DQ? I'm just asking.

Back when I lived in the hood a heat wave brought everyone outside, and cars were not rare but, hard to come by? Now the streets are almost deserted in a heatwave - many folks have AC - and there are far more cars.

And the average new home SF is way, way more nationwide.

The bad news is, there doesn't seem to be government cheese anymore and good Ohio grown sensi is gone. Plus computer controlled cars. There's always a down side

Pete

As usual Pete you're full of shit.

A lot of poor people don't have AC.

And those that do generally have a piece of shit window unit that uses twice the electricity that it should. As for those big new McMansions that are bringing up the average square footage, poor people don't live in them. They live mostly in shitty little dumps that were built 50 or more years ago. I can go over to the poor side of town and take some pictures and post them if you don't believe me.

And that doesn't count all the poor people that are living in their cars, or bunking down in some vacant lot behind a shopping center,

http://www.portlandrescuemission.org...omeless-sleep/

10 PLACES HOMELESS PEOPLE SLEEP
(Credit to www.Change.org)

Living without a home of your own is a devastating experience. But sleeping without a home is downright difficult. Some of these places receive media attention. Others may surprise you. But all of these overnight accommodations are completely unacceptable for regular human habitation.
1. Storage Units

Many have called storage units the modern-day cardboard box. Sure, they’re not ideal, but they’re dry, secure and beat the dangers of the street. And they offer a way for people to keep some of their belongings rather than abandon them or have them stolen.
2. Cars

Living out of a vehicle may seem like a bearable solution to losing one’s home. But when your home is on four wheels, it’s impossible to sit still. Each day, you must be on the go to evade authorities and the expensive citations for illegal parking or sleeping in a vehicle (Yes, there are ordinances against this.). You sleep with one eye open; you can never be perfectly at ease. And the nomadic lifestyle makes it difficult for homeless organizations to stay in touch to provide help.
3. Motels

Cheap motels became the newest thing in subsidized housing and the de facto shelter for families affected by the recession in 2009. For families, it’s an affordable alternative to shelter and safer than the streets. But with cramped rooms, unsafe conditions, and little space for cooking, it is far from a good alternative to safe, decent housing. And when money runs out, families are back on the street.
4. Tent Cities

Since the economy has been hurting, homeless encampments have sprung up in communities across the U.S. Some – like Sacramento, Providence, or Nickelsville – garner lots of media attention; others go quietly unnoticed. As diverse the residents and characteristics of these communities may be, they all have on thing in common: they are cloaked in controversy. Portland’s tent city is Dignity Village (http://www.dignityvillage.org).
5. Parks

After walking all day or night, it’s tempting for a homeless man or woman to stretch out on the lawn or a bench for some rest. Parks are open to the public and a decent place to get a nap during the day. But sleeping in the park at night is usually interrupted by police asking offenders to move along.
6. Streets

While it may seem counter-intuitive that a homeless person would choose to stay on the streets rather than in a homeless shelter, there are understandable reasons for doing so. Shelters tend to attract people who are chronically homeless and addicted. This can be frightening to someone newly homeless or to those who struggle with mental illness or social phobias.
7. Foreclosed Houses

Across the country, hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes are boarded up, idle and empty. At the same time, homelessness has been on the rise and the need for decent affordable housing is as great as ever. It comes as no surprise that homeless men and women choose to become squatters in vacant homes.
8. Abandoned Buildings

Much like the situation with foreclosed homes, there’s no shortage of empty warehouses and other business buildings where homeless men and women take shelter.
9. Couches

When homelessness strikes, friends and relatives are often the first place of refuge. Homeless families and individuals sleep on couches, in garages/sheds and backyard tents. Although they are technically homeless, they are unseen and left uncounted in an official homeless census – until the hospitality wears out. Then, they end up on the street.
10. We Don’t Know

For all of those homeless individuals whose unfortunate living situations are documented, recorded, and broadcast to the public, there are hundreds more who remain anonymous. The methodology for finding and counting homeless people is imperfect; we simply do not find everyone.

[piece-itpete]

Poor people tend to live in smaller houses? Stop yanking my chain.

Pete

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Anyone who thinks we DON'T have more spending cash is crazy! Look around - how much crap do you have? How much did we used to have?

Pete

Priorities have changed, for one thing. Through the 1940s through the 1970s my father fed and raised a family of nine on a single blue collar income. Try that today, Pete. It just isn't going to happen. Most families are much smaller today and must bring in two incomes or more, to get by.

Raising large families was the "thing" back then. Our generation is more obsessed with material possessions. "Things" seem to have become more important to us than people. Though I am just as guilty as anyone, I believe this is our shame and the root of many of todays problems.

Ask yourself this;

"How many people do I know that struggle just to keep food in their bellies and a roof over their heads than did when I was a kid?"

For me, this represents a number I regard as far too high.

I am currently reading "Losing Our Way" by Bob Herbert. There is a line in the book that rings true from my experiences;

(Paraphrased)

"It seemed that so long as he worked hard and kept his nose clean, a young man could find rewarding work at a local factory and start a family, almost straight out of high school. Then, at some point a couple had to bring in a second income in order to maintain the same decent standard of living. Over the last 15 years or so, this has declined to a situation wherein millions of Americans work, many working multiple part time jobs and find themselves in need of public assistance anyways."

We may differ somewhat on our notions of how we arrived at this state, but neither of us can deny that we as a nation, have. And, I think we can both agree that it is, or at least should be, unacceptable.

When did we lose the belief that Americans could find a better way than this?
When did we resign ourselves to the idea that life, for so many people, is just going to suck and that's just how it is?

I don't know about you, my friend. Bu I have lost sleep wondering about this.

It really does make me that sad.

Dave