Skip to main content

"JUST SAY NO!" to Reaganomics



I think TIME has proven this to be a failed economic policy. As you'll read in this article, even President G.H.W. Bush, saw it as a sham, calling it "VooDoo Economics." And as the first Pres. Bush would also say, "JUST SAY NO!"

I stated in one of my first posts:

We have CEOs who live in ivory towers. We have a conservative base who still believes some of that wealth is going to trickle down out of the ivory tower and magically make a difference at ground level. Has it made a difference in your life?

In evaluating the effects of Reaganomics, Paul Krugman points out in his January 2008 NY Times Op-ed, "But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen."

We NEED our middle class. And while I don't think the rich should be taxed at 91%, it shouldn't be 28%, either! The Salon.com article, "Reaganomics killed America's middle class," promotes the redistribution of wealth through taxation. I'm for the FAIR distribution of wealth through more ethical taxation. After all, if the uber wealthy are going to have their voices heard the loudest on Capitol Hill, then they should pay more in taxes, right? No taxation without representation, I say.

From a Harvard International article titled, "VooDoo Curse: Exorcising the Legacy of Reaganomics:"

The bottom line of supply-side policy is productivity growth. Although Reaganomics cannot be blamed for the slowdown that began around 1973, its well-advertised remedies were policy failures. Throughout the 1980s, productivity growth remained disappointingly low for the economy as a whole...

Most articles I've found debunking Reaganomics show that government spending didn't actually go down in the 1980's, it just shifted from public programs to defense spending. And the middle class PAID FOR IT!

Let me reiterate, we CANNOT tax our way to equality, but we can create a more level playing field, with those at the top who have more political clout, carrying more of the tax burden. We can augment fairer taxation with incentives to corporations that take better care of their community and the environment, lessening the burden on the people and their government. Businesses are better equipped to manage programs, anyway. They have the means, the manpower and the know-how.

As the Salon.com article shows, a strong, vibrant middle class advances social justice issues, like it did Civil Rights and gender equality in the 1960's (though we admittedly have a long way to go on both fronts!). We need to bring back our middle class. Reaganomics wasn't the boon it was meant to be. It was by all practical measures A BUST! And it led us to the current state of the one-percenters versus everyone else. I'd like to see us NOT have to have a French-style revolution to reverse this course. I fear that's where this country is headed, though, due to deepening tensions, fear and polarization. Save that for another post.

Thanks for reading and commenting below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Moral Business Practices = Success

This business owner GETS IT! Jonathan Wallace, a New York attorney and activist that once led a highly successful tech business, has been a writer and lecturer for a number of years on topics related to government, ethics, law, economic and social issues. In 1996, he launched Ethical Spectacle , a website where he shares his views on the world. That's where I stumbled upon his online article, " Compassionate Capitalism ," the day that I started this blog. The thing that struck me most about his article is the following axiom. Two other successful businessmen who get it are Marc Benioff (Salesforce.com) and Alan Hassenfeld (Hasbro, Inc.). The former authored a book, Compassionate Capitalism: How Corporations Can Make Doing Good an Integral Part of Doing Well , in 2004, and the latter wrote the foreword. Hassenfeld, who was CEO of Hasbro, Inc., before becoming Chairman of the Board, implores his capitalist colleagues to become more socially responsible by connec...

What's in a name?

WHY wrongcapitalism.blogspot.com? Truth be told, "compassionate capitalism" was already in use. And we've been practicing "wrong capitalism" since the foundation of this republic, I'm afraid. As I stated in my very first blog post, WHY? , I want this blog to stand for something. It's stated purpose is to take the "I" out of capitalism. Yes, there are two I's, but my point being that self-centered capitalism has another name: GREED. You'll notice the color of the header on this post is green. We've been singularly focused on the Almighty Dollar for far too long. And where has it gotten us? We are the richest nation in the world and poverty still affects millions of us. According to UCDavis, and I just Googled this today, "The official poverty rate is 13.5 percent, based on the U.S. Census Bureau's 2015 estimates. That year, an estimated 43.1 million Americans lived in poverty." Can you wrap your head around th...