http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/30/opinion/30KRUG.html
As always, Krugman is The Man. He lays out the facts, and the facts say that most Americans are not being helped at all by the so-called economic turnaround. The funny thing is Bush doesn't even bother with bullshit metaphors like "the trickle-down effect," a classic of Reaganomics. Bush just flat-out lies about the beneficiaries of his tax cuts and supposed economic gains. I'm beginning to appreciate why most Americans don't care about politics, and why they tune out the rest of the world. Maybe they're right? It's just too frustrating to care, when you know you're going to get screwed anyway. The only question I have is a question of the long term, not the short term: At what point do people feel like they're getting screwed too much? What's going to be the tipping point for reform or revolt in the United States?
Some excerpts from Krugman's piece:
"So if jobs are scarce and wages are flat, who's benefiting from the economy's expansion? The direct gains are going largely to corporate profits, which rose at an annual rate of more than 40 percent in the third quarter. Indirectly, that means that gains are going to stockholders, who are the ultimate owners of corporate profits. (That is, if the gains don't go to self-dealing executives, but let's save that topic for another day.)"
"A good indicator of the share of increased profits that goes to different income groups is the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the share of the corporate profits tax that falls, indirectly, on those groups. According to the most recent estimate, only 8 percent of corporate taxes were paid by the poorest 60 percent of families, while 67 percent were paid by the richest 5 percent, and 49 percent by the richest 1 percent. ("Class warfare!" the right shouts.) So a recovery that boosts profits but not wages delivers the bulk of its benefits to a small, affluent minority."
4:27:17 PM 
|
|
