.
Feedback

Blog: Trickle Downward—Where Republicans Would Lead Us

Trickle down economics might soak the middle class. What’s trickling down is not economic help from the rich; it’s the direction we’re heading as a nation.

Not long ago, we set the standard for industrial productivity, for the quality of our infrastructure, for the growth and prosperity of our middle class. What happened?

We used to be the world leader in the percentage of young people with college degrees. We are now 12th among 36 developed nations.

We have become, as Bob Herbert noted in his op-ed column in The New York Times, “a nation of nitwits, obsessed with the comings and goings of Lindsay Lohan and increasingly oblivious to crucially important societal issues that are all but screaming for attention. What should we be doing about the legions of jobless Americans, the deteriorating public schools, the debilitating wars, the scandalous economic inequality, the corporate hold on governmental affairs, the commercialization of the arts, the deficits?”

Where is the public outcry? What are the candidates fighting about? What are you voting for?

The Republican Party has downplayed the role of government in education, the single most important tool in building the middle class. The Republican candidates plan to privatize Social Security, the only income for millions of seniors who have paid into the program since they were old enough to work. Congressional Republicans promise to kill current healthcare reform legislation, passed to help heal the growing cancer on our national debt. Republicans want to send jobs overseas, to make more jobs for us here at home, they say. And they want to deregulate the banks and Wall Street. Hello?

The Republican theory of "trickle down economics" suggests that money from the the rich will ultimately reach the poor, create jobs, build industry and infrastructure, help private colleges and small businesses, and cure all of our economic woes. In fact, it might soak the middle class!

What’s trickling down is not economic help from the rich; it’s the direction we’re heading as a nation. We need a social, governmental, and intellectual lift upwards.

Jamie October 19, 2012 at 11:58 am
Oh so DC should suck up greedily all the private monies, and live very high off the hog as well as buy more power with the confiscated money, and maybe some trickles back down to "the masses", just enough to keep them in stupor.
sorelly2002@yahoo.com October 19, 2012 at 02:06 pm
Wow. I love the capacity we have to really filter information to confirm our biases. Do you really feel that the majority of Republicans sit around plotting the destruction of the educational system in this country? Do you really think Republicans sit around thinking "oh screw the elderly!". Really?? The fact of the matter is that Republicans and Democrats have EQUALLY screwed the middle class in this country in their own particular ways...and in ways they have jointly participated in the process. However, the fact that Democrats insist that they are the "Saviors" of the middle class yet ignore TOTALLY the ongoing devaluation of the US dollar and the rampant destructive effects of a loose monetary policy and fractional reserve banking (these two things being THE BIGGEST destroyer of the middle class in this country) and the complete corruption and out and out conflict of interests inherent in collective bargaining in government unions that have had a terribly negative effect on both the quality of our educational system and the underlying finances of city and state budgets..well to me that is just confirmation that both political parties are a farce and total hypocrites. Democrats will never "save the day", just as much as Republicans won't. Both have participated in the destruction of the US Dollar and so both are equally implicit in the destruction of the middle class. So much projection going on!!!
Jay Berman October 19, 2012 at 02:44 pm
::rolling eyes:: I'm looking forward to seeing President Romney put together a stellar cabinet, no czars ... so we can recover from the huge mistake we made 4 years ago ... We need to start making things again, reindustrialize .. that will put people back to work creating taxpayers ...
RealRepublican October 19, 2012 at 04:55 pm
All this right wing propaganda in the comments is hilarious. Their lies and Orwellian propaganda were exposed years ago, but they keep repeating them.
Sorelly2002: The average Republican does not have to sit around and contemplate the destruction of public education - because Republican politicians and their billionaire backers already have worked out the plans. Then they brainwash you sheeple with soft sounding yet hollow mantras like "compassionate conservatism" so you check the box for them - despite the fact that they'll screw us all including you (unless you have foreign bank accounts and declare more than $500,000 as taxable income). Jay: "Czars" is just a term that Karl Rove & Lee Atwater politicized. It was actually used as an expression for Special Assistant to the President by Nixon. You can call them whatever you want, but every Republican President since Eisenhower has had Special Assistants. You can call them Chief Google or Bat Boy, buty it doesn't change the fact that they are just advisers - just like Karl Rove was or Al Haig or Dick Cheney (for Nixon).
RealRepublican October 19, 2012 at 04:58 pm
Jamie: If you are worried about the Federal Deficit and Federal Debt, then you should be incensed by Republican tax policy and Mitt Romney's tax scams in particular which is an example of the special interest tax giveaways that add over $1 Trillion to the debt & deficit each year. You are, however, probably unaware (or ignore) the fact that such stale mantras such as "end corporate double taxation" are pure lies because any company big enough to afford $25,000 per year on a tax attorney can eliminate practically all corporate taxes by setting up a Cayman Islands shell company just like Mitt Romney did. Those Cayman Islands companies pay ZERO US taxes (and usually no taxes ANYWHERE), and then pass through "income" to the owners/shareholders like Mitt Romney as 'tax preference items' meaning 'qualified dividends' and/or 'capital gains' which is how Romney got his tax rate down below 14%. These tax preference items are taxed only @15% so even without 'charitable contributions', their tax rate is never over 15% and they don't even pay any Social Security taxes because those items are not considered "earned income". Yet, those owners/shareholders and Cayman Islands companies use American Government services (incl. the US Military, US Patent Office, US Court System, US Trade Office, Department of Commerce) to promote and protect their interest and assets around the globe - even manufacturing plants in China and India. Since they don't pay any taxes, you & I & our kids have to pay.
donald Johnson October 19, 2012 at 10:47 pm
I would rather have trickle down economics than the tear down economics that Obama (and all the other progressive/liberal/communist/Marxist)are trying to set up. If you tear down the financial support that the rich have you will no longer have any financial stability left to work with.
Ron Selkovitch October 20, 2012 at 11:30 pm
Donald, do you have any idea what you mean by: "progressive/liberal/communist/Marxist"
Dan Frazier October 25, 2012 at 02:05 pm
I totally agree with Mr. Herbert’s statement that Jac posted above but find it interesting that many choose to blame only the Republicans for whatever ills our society is currently suffering. In my humble opinion, the current state of affairs is (for the most part anyway) due to the failings of BOTH sides of the aisle in BOTH houses of Congress. I wouldn’t dare defend the role of the R’s concerning those matters nor would I place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the D’s. As far as I’m concerned most politicians are simply a necessary evil requiring more strict controls than most voters are willing to impose on them. As someone once said, we may not always get the government we desire but, as a group, we most certainly get the one we deserve.
Now is the time to put aside pre-conceived notions, define the problem and select the candidate most qualified to correct that problem. Who has the better economic track record: Obama or Romney? That choice seems to be pretty clear.
Dan Frazier October 25, 2012 at 02:21 pm
Too many people seem to believe that people who seek to acquire wealth do so in order to prevent OTHERS from acquiring it….this is NOT a zero-sum game. Those who have money (regardless of the amount) spend it in one way or another; the more you have, the more you tend to spend.
Those at the top of the economic food chain provide job opportunities for others in various ways. They may have large homes with pools, fancy cars, private jets, luxury yachts and take expensive vacations among other things but just think of all the jobs created in order to service all of those things. In addition, most of them also choose to invest part of that wealth in various ways which also creates more job opportunities for others. It may be in the form of starting or expanding their own business or investing in others so that THEY can do so. Either way, it is a domino effect which creates opportunities at all levels of the chain. The thing to remember when deciding what really is a “fair share” is the fact that for every dollar “confiscated” by the government via taxes, that is one less dollar available to create a new job or quite possibly to even save an existing job. That is one dollar closer someone may be to even losing the job they currently have. A rising tide lifts ALL boats, why scuttle the ship simply because you envy the captain’s uniform? I have infinitely more faith in the ability of private citizens to decide how best to spend money than in the government's efforts.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:37 am
An initiative to Prop A has worked in Escondido, without any lawsuits. "In the 26-yearRead More history of Encinitas, no council has ever used this provision to approve a major project without first a vote of the people." That's completely untrue. The North 101 and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plans were pushed through by the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and a supermajority of past Council AGAINST the wishes of citizens, against years of feedback from Specific Action Review Committees (Sparc)s and Community Advisory Boards (CABs), who wanted to stay with the limits of the General Plan of two stories, 30 ft, MAX, with certain exceptions, consistent with the Initiative! Just posting your opinion without any supporting evidence, Mr. Stocks, is only hurting your "cause." We and everyone we know, all our friends and neighbors, are voting YES on A! Voting YES is best if you want to take back your ability to help slow growth and to take back local control. Yes on A is a vote for Democracy and against insider influence and spinmaster jive promoted by marketing masters of misinformation, attempting to manipulate the uninformed masses with distortions of the truth. We don't need to be spoon-fed our opinions, but can think for ourselves, and act to protect and preserve our community character and our quality of life.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:19 pm
Lies, lies and more lies. That's all the supporters of "No on Prop A" can come up with.Read More Even their slogan is weak and devoid of anything of substance… "It's not what it seems"… Really, THAT'S your argument against it?
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 07:22 pm
YES on PROP A which is NOT deeply flawed and very well written.