I'm Back With Truly Alarming News.
Hello again everyone. I trust that you are all either rich and famous, or you are being crushed by the weight of 30 years worth of Republican economics (in other words, poor). I know that you aren't middle class.
How do I know that you aren't middle class? Well, take a look at this article on Yahoo. THE ARTICLE. And now you know how I know that you're not middle class.
Folks, the sheer fact of the matter is that the loss of the middle class is not the work of the Democrats, or the Obama Administration. The erosion of the middle class has been occurring ever since Reagan introduced the "Trickle Down" theory of economics. The idea in Trickle Down economics is that as the rich get richer, they invest that wealth in the financial markets (stocks, bonds, etc). As the rich invest in stocks, companies find that they now have more capital to work with and, subsequently, they can expand operations, hire new workers, and, generally, make the economy grow, which will have the beneficial effect of higher wages and benefits for the average Joe (due to a limited labor pool and higher demand for that pool).
Unfortunately, Trickle Down economics ignores two vital components of any capitalist economy, greed and limited demand for any product that any company produces. Let's start with limited demand, ok? In any economic market, demand for a product will be limited by it's cost and by the number of consumers who need or want the product. As an example, let's say you make widgets (economists love widgets). Let's also say that you make the finest widgets on the market and therefore you charge a bit more for them than the crap widgets from China. By pricing your widget above that of the Chinese widgets, you limit the number of people who can afford to buy your widgets. We'll say that your widgets cost $100 versus $75 for the Chinese version. Now we will say that the average widget buyer has $300 to spend on widgets, food, rent, etc. The average widget buyer will most likely buy the Chinese widget due to cost (if he spent all of his money on widgets, he could get 4 Chinese widgets as opposed to only 3 of your widgets). As consumers, we have been taught either through our parents, our education, or real world experiences to shop around for the best bargain possible. We are also taught that sometimes the best bargain isn't the least expensive item, but the item which offer the best value for money. Thus if you make widgets that break after 5 uses and the Chinese widget breaks after 5 uses, the Chinese one will be a better bargain, and more people will purchase it. However, if your widget breaks after 10 uses and the Chinese one breaks after 5 uses, then your higher priced widget is a better bargain (yours: $10 per use vs China: $15 per use) and, subsequently, consumers will pick your widget. However, there comes a point where, no matter the cost, everyone who needs, wants, or can afford a widget will have obtained one. At this point, your widget company, as well as the Chinese widget maker's, will start to experience downturn in the demand for widgets. As a result, you won't have to make as many widgets to supply the lesser demand. If you don't have to make as many widgets to satisfy the market demand, you will also experience a drop in profits. When a company's profits drop, people get laid off. When people get laid off, the labor pool increases and wages begin to shrink due to greater supply but lesser demand for the labor in the pool. That wage shrinkage means that fewer people will be able to afford to buy your higher priced widgets, which means less profit for your company, which means more lay offs. Trickle Down economics completely ignores this component of the market place. It offers no solution to a downturn in the economy. Trickle Down only works if the economy is already running at a high level. Trickle Down worked during the economic boom of the 1980s because consumer confidence was high and subsequently people spent their money freely. When the economy went to shit in the early 90s, people curtailed their free spending ways and we had a recession. The same economic model that made Reagan look like a genius made George HW Bush look like an inept moron. Why you ask. Simply put, the market was saturated by consumer good that we didn't want or need. When people realized that they could live without $150 sneakers, and bought a $30 pair, retailers started to feel a pinch in their profits and began to jettison unnecessary staff. On top of all this, real wages actually shrank in the period from 1981 until 1991 due to the change over from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. The wages didn't shrink by a vast amount, but it was enough to make people have to think about what they bought. This was coupled with the fact that the rich started to pull their money out of stocks and put it into safer investments (like Treasury bonds and gold), meant that companies had less money to put into wages, and thus wages shrank and people got laid off. Trickle Down never anticipated that the rich weren't about to lose money on a deal. It viewed the rich as benefactors when in fact, the rich are normal human beings with lots of money that they want to hang on to. If you inherited your money, you might be a little free with it, but if you earned your money, you're going to do everything possible to hold on to it and to make more if you can. Trickle Down economics never anticipated that someone might be somewhat greedy. It never anticipated that the rich might want to make more money off the backs of the working man. The tax breaks granted to the rich under the Trickle Down theory were supposed to be invested in things that would make the economy stronger. Instead, the rich pocketed the money that they saved through the tax breaks and, in most cases, moved that money into off shore banks (where they could hide it). They also took the profits that they had made on their investments, and instead of reinvesting it, moved the money out of the country.
After George HW Bush left office, Clinton got the economy going again by relaxing the lending rules for obtaining a mortgage, and by allowing the banks to now invest in the stock market (that is normal banks, not investment banks who were allowed to invest all along.) The problem with Clinton's plan was that by encouraging a relaxation of the rules regarding mortgage lending, banks were lured into making loans to people who couldn't afford to pay them back. At first, this wasn't a big deal. Then, as the rule of supply and demand kicked in, real estate prices started to trend upward to the point that a house worth $100k in 1990 was worth double or triple that amount in 2000. The real value of the house didn't increase, but the demand for the house drove the asking price through the roof. The idea behind increasing home ownership was a good one. Home ownership has always been a benchmark of being middle class. By increasing home ownership, the intent was to increase the size of the middle class (which had shrunk under Reagan and GHW Bush). While the intent was good, the results were not. When the sub-prime bubble burst, those who were barely making their mortgage payments each month ended up in foreclosure. Now couple that increased foreclosure with the tax breaks given to the rich by GW Bush and his Republican lapdogs, the increased drain on the economy by fighting a bullshit war in Iraq (not to eradicate terrorists, but to satisfy W's Macbeth complex), increased fuel costs due to the Iraq war, and the fact that the idiot Wall Street bankers invested in bad debt that they knew was bad before they invested in it (they were hoping to sell it before anyone realized what was going on, thus turning a quick profit), and you can begin to see how the economy went to hell in a hand basket.
Now for a real challenge. Guess who gets to pay for the mess that the Republicans and GW Bush made? Anyone, anyone, Bueller? That's right, the rapidly shrinking middle class. The rich won't be paying for it. They've already moved their wealth out of the country to places where it can't be taxed. As far as the money they have inside the country, well thanks to GW Bush and his Republican buddies, the rich aren't getting taxed on the majority of that either. So therefore, the burden of paying for Bush's failed policies, his war in Iraq (all because Saddam embarrassed W's daddy), the no bid contracts that Cheney got his Halliburton buddies, tax breaks for the rich, and W's free money giveaway to Wall Street (i.e. his "you don't have to pay it back" bailout) falls on an already overburdened middle class.
The Republicans and the Teabaggers are livid about the things that Obama is doing. They are completely incensed by the bailout (those companies and banks receiving money DO have to pay it back), the health care act, extensions of unemployment benefits, and the like. For the life of me, I can't figure out why. The things that Obama is doing are to help out the poor and middle class. Perhaps, if the Teabaggers turned off Limbaugh, Beck, and/or Fox News for a while, they might figure out that the person responsible for this mess isn't Obama, but George W Bush. If the Teabaggers became literate and read a bit, they might figure out that the legislation that has been passed is designed to help out people just like them. Given recent Teabagger behavior, the problem isn't so much that they have a problem with Obama's policies, but rather that they have a problem with his skin color. The legislation passed by Congress and signed by Obama will help more than 50 million Americans. That's 1/6th of the entire population. Meanwhile, the Republicans, fueled by the neo-fascist Teabaggers, continue to try to destroy the middle class and this country by doing things like twice (once in March, once in June) trying to kill extensions of unemployment benefits, introducing legislation that would reduce the inheritance tax for 55% to 35% for those that inherit over $5 million, and introducing legislation that would extend Bush's tax breaks for the rich. This is on top of trying to deny millions of Americans health care by attempting to block the health care bill (not to mention the outright lies they told while attempting to block it, things like it sets up "death panels", you'll have to get a chip implanted in your hand so that the gov't can track you, that our health care system is the best in the world [it's not, it's ranked 37th by UNWHO]and those with socialized medicine routinely let people dying in waiting rooms due to lack of funding). At every turn, the Republicans have tried to block any legislation that would help out the poor and the middle class. The Republicans have sold their souls to the rich and to big business. And the Teabaggers are supporting them every step of the way, either too dumb to realize that they are being financially raped by the Republicans or too brainwashed by Fox News to understand the issues and think for themselves. Hopefully the Teabaggers will wake up before November and realize that the Republicans using them in a blatant attempt to regain power. After November, the Republicans will jettison the Teabaggers, distance themselves from the Teabagger movement, and treat the the Teabaggers with contempt. Wake up people, if you are a Teabagger you need to know that you are being used by both Fox News and the Republican party to further an agenda designed to destroy you and your family by making you paupers while making the rich even richer. You have rights and dignity, why do you want to throw that away to grovel at the feet of a corporate master? If you Teabaggers don't believe that this is true, just look at the things the Republicans have done to try to destroy the middle class. Open your eyes people. The neo-fascist Republicans only have their own best interests at heart, they could care less about you Teabaggers and your ultimate success or failure. To the Republicans, you are just another resource to be used and discarded at their whim.
Well, enough ranting. The sheer fact of the matter is that the Republicans and their Teabagger bitches are trying to destroy this country and the middle class. It is time for the middle class and the vast silent majority to stand up and say "Enough is enough, we will not let the Republicans and the rich destroy us!" It is time to stand up and show the neo-fascists that spew their lies and vitriol from the bully pulpit of Fox News and talk radio that we see through their plans to turn this country into a third world nation and we're not going to take it anymore! Long live the middle class!
I am Chuck and this has been my rant. And if you're a Teabagger or a Republican and you don't like this, fuck off as I have had about enough of your treasonous, little dicked, homophobic, racist, nazi, theocracy-demanding bullshit!
How do I know that you aren't middle class? Well, take a look at this article on Yahoo. THE ARTICLE. And now you know how I know that you're not middle class.
Folks, the sheer fact of the matter is that the loss of the middle class is not the work of the Democrats, or the Obama Administration. The erosion of the middle class has been occurring ever since Reagan introduced the "Trickle Down" theory of economics. The idea in Trickle Down economics is that as the rich get richer, they invest that wealth in the financial markets (stocks, bonds, etc). As the rich invest in stocks, companies find that they now have more capital to work with and, subsequently, they can expand operations, hire new workers, and, generally, make the economy grow, which will have the beneficial effect of higher wages and benefits for the average Joe (due to a limited labor pool and higher demand for that pool).
Unfortunately, Trickle Down economics ignores two vital components of any capitalist economy, greed and limited demand for any product that any company produces. Let's start with limited demand, ok? In any economic market, demand for a product will be limited by it's cost and by the number of consumers who need or want the product. As an example, let's say you make widgets (economists love widgets). Let's also say that you make the finest widgets on the market and therefore you charge a bit more for them than the crap widgets from China. By pricing your widget above that of the Chinese widgets, you limit the number of people who can afford to buy your widgets. We'll say that your widgets cost $100 versus $75 for the Chinese version. Now we will say that the average widget buyer has $300 to spend on widgets, food, rent, etc. The average widget buyer will most likely buy the Chinese widget due to cost (if he spent all of his money on widgets, he could get 4 Chinese widgets as opposed to only 3 of your widgets). As consumers, we have been taught either through our parents, our education, or real world experiences to shop around for the best bargain possible. We are also taught that sometimes the best bargain isn't the least expensive item, but the item which offer the best value for money. Thus if you make widgets that break after 5 uses and the Chinese widget breaks after 5 uses, the Chinese one will be a better bargain, and more people will purchase it. However, if your widget breaks after 10 uses and the Chinese one breaks after 5 uses, then your higher priced widget is a better bargain (yours: $10 per use vs China: $15 per use) and, subsequently, consumers will pick your widget. However, there comes a point where, no matter the cost, everyone who needs, wants, or can afford a widget will have obtained one. At this point, your widget company, as well as the Chinese widget maker's, will start to experience downturn in the demand for widgets. As a result, you won't have to make as many widgets to supply the lesser demand. If you don't have to make as many widgets to satisfy the market demand, you will also experience a drop in profits. When a company's profits drop, people get laid off. When people get laid off, the labor pool increases and wages begin to shrink due to greater supply but lesser demand for the labor in the pool. That wage shrinkage means that fewer people will be able to afford to buy your higher priced widgets, which means less profit for your company, which means more lay offs. Trickle Down economics completely ignores this component of the market place. It offers no solution to a downturn in the economy. Trickle Down only works if the economy is already running at a high level. Trickle Down worked during the economic boom of the 1980s because consumer confidence was high and subsequently people spent their money freely. When the economy went to shit in the early 90s, people curtailed their free spending ways and we had a recession. The same economic model that made Reagan look like a genius made George HW Bush look like an inept moron. Why you ask. Simply put, the market was saturated by consumer good that we didn't want or need. When people realized that they could live without $150 sneakers, and bought a $30 pair, retailers started to feel a pinch in their profits and began to jettison unnecessary staff. On top of all this, real wages actually shrank in the period from 1981 until 1991 due to the change over from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. The wages didn't shrink by a vast amount, but it was enough to make people have to think about what they bought. This was coupled with the fact that the rich started to pull their money out of stocks and put it into safer investments (like Treasury bonds and gold), meant that companies had less money to put into wages, and thus wages shrank and people got laid off. Trickle Down never anticipated that the rich weren't about to lose money on a deal. It viewed the rich as benefactors when in fact, the rich are normal human beings with lots of money that they want to hang on to. If you inherited your money, you might be a little free with it, but if you earned your money, you're going to do everything possible to hold on to it and to make more if you can. Trickle Down economics never anticipated that someone might be somewhat greedy. It never anticipated that the rich might want to make more money off the backs of the working man. The tax breaks granted to the rich under the Trickle Down theory were supposed to be invested in things that would make the economy stronger. Instead, the rich pocketed the money that they saved through the tax breaks and, in most cases, moved that money into off shore banks (where they could hide it). They also took the profits that they had made on their investments, and instead of reinvesting it, moved the money out of the country.
After George HW Bush left office, Clinton got the economy going again by relaxing the lending rules for obtaining a mortgage, and by allowing the banks to now invest in the stock market (that is normal banks, not investment banks who were allowed to invest all along.) The problem with Clinton's plan was that by encouraging a relaxation of the rules regarding mortgage lending, banks were lured into making loans to people who couldn't afford to pay them back. At first, this wasn't a big deal. Then, as the rule of supply and demand kicked in, real estate prices started to trend upward to the point that a house worth $100k in 1990 was worth double or triple that amount in 2000. The real value of the house didn't increase, but the demand for the house drove the asking price through the roof. The idea behind increasing home ownership was a good one. Home ownership has always been a benchmark of being middle class. By increasing home ownership, the intent was to increase the size of the middle class (which had shrunk under Reagan and GHW Bush). While the intent was good, the results were not. When the sub-prime bubble burst, those who were barely making their mortgage payments each month ended up in foreclosure. Now couple that increased foreclosure with the tax breaks given to the rich by GW Bush and his Republican lapdogs, the increased drain on the economy by fighting a bullshit war in Iraq (not to eradicate terrorists, but to satisfy W's Macbeth complex), increased fuel costs due to the Iraq war, and the fact that the idiot Wall Street bankers invested in bad debt that they knew was bad before they invested in it (they were hoping to sell it before anyone realized what was going on, thus turning a quick profit), and you can begin to see how the economy went to hell in a hand basket.
Now for a real challenge. Guess who gets to pay for the mess that the Republicans and GW Bush made? Anyone, anyone, Bueller? That's right, the rapidly shrinking middle class. The rich won't be paying for it. They've already moved their wealth out of the country to places where it can't be taxed. As far as the money they have inside the country, well thanks to GW Bush and his Republican buddies, the rich aren't getting taxed on the majority of that either. So therefore, the burden of paying for Bush's failed policies, his war in Iraq (all because Saddam embarrassed W's daddy), the no bid contracts that Cheney got his Halliburton buddies, tax breaks for the rich, and W's free money giveaway to Wall Street (i.e. his "you don't have to pay it back" bailout) falls on an already overburdened middle class.
The Republicans and the Teabaggers are livid about the things that Obama is doing. They are completely incensed by the bailout (those companies and banks receiving money DO have to pay it back), the health care act, extensions of unemployment benefits, and the like. For the life of me, I can't figure out why. The things that Obama is doing are to help out the poor and middle class. Perhaps, if the Teabaggers turned off Limbaugh, Beck, and/or Fox News for a while, they might figure out that the person responsible for this mess isn't Obama, but George W Bush. If the Teabaggers became literate and read a bit, they might figure out that the legislation that has been passed is designed to help out people just like them. Given recent Teabagger behavior, the problem isn't so much that they have a problem with Obama's policies, but rather that they have a problem with his skin color. The legislation passed by Congress and signed by Obama will help more than 50 million Americans. That's 1/6th of the entire population. Meanwhile, the Republicans, fueled by the neo-fascist Teabaggers, continue to try to destroy the middle class and this country by doing things like twice (once in March, once in June) trying to kill extensions of unemployment benefits, introducing legislation that would reduce the inheritance tax for 55% to 35% for those that inherit over $5 million, and introducing legislation that would extend Bush's tax breaks for the rich. This is on top of trying to deny millions of Americans health care by attempting to block the health care bill (not to mention the outright lies they told while attempting to block it, things like it sets up "death panels", you'll have to get a chip implanted in your hand so that the gov't can track you, that our health care system is the best in the world [it's not, it's ranked 37th by UNWHO]and those with socialized medicine routinely let people dying in waiting rooms due to lack of funding). At every turn, the Republicans have tried to block any legislation that would help out the poor and the middle class. The Republicans have sold their souls to the rich and to big business. And the Teabaggers are supporting them every step of the way, either too dumb to realize that they are being financially raped by the Republicans or too brainwashed by Fox News to understand the issues and think for themselves. Hopefully the Teabaggers will wake up before November and realize that the Republicans using them in a blatant attempt to regain power. After November, the Republicans will jettison the Teabaggers, distance themselves from the Teabagger movement, and treat the the Teabaggers with contempt. Wake up people, if you are a Teabagger you need to know that you are being used by both Fox News and the Republican party to further an agenda designed to destroy you and your family by making you paupers while making the rich even richer. You have rights and dignity, why do you want to throw that away to grovel at the feet of a corporate master? If you Teabaggers don't believe that this is true, just look at the things the Republicans have done to try to destroy the middle class. Open your eyes people. The neo-fascist Republicans only have their own best interests at heart, they could care less about you Teabaggers and your ultimate success or failure. To the Republicans, you are just another resource to be used and discarded at their whim.
Well, enough ranting. The sheer fact of the matter is that the Republicans and their Teabagger bitches are trying to destroy this country and the middle class. It is time for the middle class and the vast silent majority to stand up and say "Enough is enough, we will not let the Republicans and the rich destroy us!" It is time to stand up and show the neo-fascists that spew their lies and vitriol from the bully pulpit of Fox News and talk radio that we see through their plans to turn this country into a third world nation and we're not going to take it anymore! Long live the middle class!
I am Chuck and this has been my rant. And if you're a Teabagger or a Republican and you don't like this, fuck off as I have had about enough of your treasonous, little dicked, homophobic, racist, nazi, theocracy-demanding bullshit!
posted by Chuck | 23:58
2 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Abel,
You comment constitutes spam, and under the rules of the blog (had you bothered to look them up) your post has been removed accordingly.
First, last, and ONLY warning--DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, SPAM MY BLOG. I CAN, AND WILL, HAVE YOU BANNED FROM NOT ONLY MY BLOG, BUT FROM BLOGGER ENTIRELY. GOT IT? GOOD! NOW PISS OFF SPAMMER SCUM!
Note: Edited for typos and re-posted 27 July 10, 0824 EDT
Post a Comment
<< Home