How Conservative Economic Policy is Destroying America

Steve KinsmanStarred Page By Steve Kinsman, 1st Apr 2013 | Follow this author | RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/25r5nlow/
Posted in Wikinut>News>Politics

A researcher at the Campaign for America's Future has compiled six charts which show how the economic policies of conservatives have failed America in a big way.

Trickle down, supply side, and voodoo economics

The economic policies that started to be put into place when Ronald Reagan became president and have been with us ever since have turned out to be an abysmal failure. Dave Johnson, a researcher with the Campaign for America's Future, has compiled six charts which show very graphically the downward slide we have been on ever since the early 1980s.

To be fair, our present dilemma is not entirely the fault of the Republicans. Bill Clinton, the great triangulator, continued and even abetted these policies when he deregulated the banks by torpedoing the Glass-Steagall Act, and by "ending welfare as we know it."

Barack Obama climbed into bed with the fat-cat Republican denizens of Wall Street and is now embracing the kind of austerity policies that are ruining Europe.

Chart #1

Conservative economic policies succeeded in transforming America from the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor nation, beginning in 1981, as the chart above shows.

Chart #2

Chart number two shows how working people's share of increased productivity, with the exception of a brief period during Bill Clinton's first term, has consistently shrunk since the institution of conservative economic policies in the early 1980's.

Chart #3

The decreasing share of the working and middle class in increased productivity resulted in a greater and greater concentration of wealth at the top. Notice that the top ten percent in terms of wealth accumulation held 49% of the wealth in 1928-29, just before the crash, and today the top ten percent hold just over fifty percent of the wealth. Notice also that the wealth of the top ten percent leveled off with the new deal and stayed in the range of 30 to 35 percent until Reagan came into office, whereupon it began a rapid acceleration.

Chart #4

As wealth steadily moved away from the middle class to the uber-rich, people were forced to spend more and save less. The savings rate of Americans peaked at 11.2% in early 1982. It has been declining ever since, and just before the economic meltdown it leveled off at minus 1.1 percent. Since 2006, then, we are spending more than we are saving.

Chart #5

Total household debt as a percentage of GDP (gross domestic product) has climbed from 50% in 1981 to over 100% today. In other words, the collective debt of the America people is greater than the value of all the goods and services produced in the United States during an entire year.

Chart #6

The final chart indicates that the economic policies of the conservatives have been disastrous in terms of promoting economic growth. From a peak period of economic growth in the range of 3.5% when Reagan took office, growth has consistently slowed to a point where it is now growing at a yearly rate of a paltry 0.5%.

Now, we are poised on the brink of instituting economic policies that the wealthiest among us are advocating, and it looks as if Mr. Obama is going to cave to the deficit hawks and the austerity advocates. At this rate, it won't be long before we find ourselves in the same boat with the people of Greece and Cyprus.

Link: For Our Survival and the Survival of our Planet, Capitalism Must End

Preview photo from wikimedia commons
All graphs from alternet.org

Tags

Conservative, Conservatives, Economics, Steve Kinsman, Supply Side Economics, Trickle Down Economics

Meet the author

author avatar Steve Kinsman
I live in California with my wife Carol, where I have been practicing professional astrology for 35 years. I write articles on astrology, but I enjoy writing on a variety of other subjects as well..

Share this page

moderator Mark Gordon Brown moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know

Comments

author avatar M G Singh
2nd Apr 2013 (#)

Nicely highlighted Steve.The goodies in America are not for ever and need to be conserved with new policies and campaigns

Reply to this comment

author avatar Mark Gordon Brown
2nd Apr 2013 (#)

It does not help when people keep sending jobs to China.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Stella Mitchell
2nd Apr 2013 (#)

A large percentage of our big corporations have moved to China or India where cheap labour is plentiful , and hundreds are chasing after too few jobs here . The latest plan is that everyone seeking employment must use the internet to apply for every position available. ..that disqualifies all who cannot access or use one . The Food bank queues are getting longer every week , and not with scroungers, but with people who have desperate needs . We are going backwards it seems and not forward.
Bless you
stella

Reply to this comment

author avatar Sivaramakrishnan A
2nd Apr 2013 (#)

Freedom and democracy are in peril for sure as desperate people are unpredictable. My simple yardstick is the rich should not get richer at the expense of the poor - in fact, it can be the other way. This will bring in better cohesion that is anytime better than a society divided and losing hope by the day. Thanks Steve for backing up with incontrovertible data - siva

Reply to this comment

author avatar Clarence Schreiber
4th Apr 2013 (#)

With jobs that are hard to come by Obama can not afford to keep spending like he was and knows that. We the tax payers must pay back all that back. When will be a way the United States get out of this big debt?

Reply to this comment

author avatar Steve Kinsman
4th Apr 2013 (#)

Debt is not the problem. It is just what they want us to believe is the problem. The problem is the powers that be want to privatize the commons and take our every last dime. By the way, Bush spent three times more than Obama has spent.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Clarence Schreiber
5th Apr 2013 (#)

Steve in my opinion sometimes privatize some things can be at times better than having things ran by our government. Sometimes it is better using someone else's money than the tax payer's money. No offense to you, but I am just saying on my mind on somethings.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Steve Kinsman
5th Apr 2013 (#)

Most operations, like Social Security for instance, are far better run by government. When you privatize, the corporation has to take its cut, and that makes everything more expensive for the consumer.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Clarence Schreiber
6th Apr 2013 (#)

Now that depends on what it is and who runs it. That is why we shop around for the best service for the best possible price.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Steve Kinsman
6th Apr 2013 (#)

Right, but government has proven it can run programs like Social Security far better and more efficiently than private industry. Unfortunately, sometimes shopping around for the best price is impossible, as when the Republicans made sure Medicare would be unable to negotiate with big pharma for lower drug prices.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Clarence Schreiber
7th Apr 2013 (#)

If the government can run programs like Social Secuity more efficiently like you say it does, then tell me why that it is going broke. If it runs efficiently I would be able to retire at 65 than 70+ by the time for me to retire. Looks like that they should take more money out to fund other things. They have done that over the years no matter who was running the country.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Steve Kinsman
7th Apr 2013 (#)

Social Security is not goimng broke. That is a myth perpetuiated by the likes of the propaghandists at Fox News. Social Security is solvent for the next twenty years. It has no deficit. If the social security tax were applied to those earning more than 113,000 dollars like it is to those who earn less, then it would be solvent for the next seventy-five years. You have to know who's feeding you b.s. Don't get your news from Fox and CNN, because what they report is not news.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Clarence Schreiber
7th Apr 2013 (#)

I for one do not think that it will be around when the younger generation gets to the required age to retire. If it is people will have to work retire when they are 100. And have to accept less benifits. Maybe we all should be more greedy.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Steve Kinsman
7th Apr 2013 (#)

Too bad we give the oil and gas companies 300 billion a year in subsidies. If we didn't do that maybe you could retire before you're 100.

Reply to this comment

Add a comment
Username
Can't login?
Password