Close but no cigar for Limbaugh here (I'm sure he can afford his own Cubans...).
Summary of a recent Limbaugh rant at Media Matters here.
RUSH LIMBAUGH: Now, here's the next New York Times story. This one -- this one is unbelievable. It's by Annie Lowrey. "President Obama says prosperity does not trickle down and that a rising tide does not lift all boats. The conservative policies predicated on those ideas, Obama maintains, amount to a you're-on-your-own economics, when the country really needs a we're-in-this-together approach."
In short, what Obama is gonna say in these speeches -- I want you to look at me, I want you to hear this so that you know what's coming, because when the press amplifies this and applauds it, you are going to become enraged. The president is going to say that prosperity comes from the middle out.
"Prosperity needs to come from the 'middle out' rather than the top down." Never mind that this has never, not once, worked. It has never succeeded, this formula of the middle class leading the economic rebound. It's not possible. The middle class benefits from it, but an economic recovery is not caused by the middle class. An economic expansion is not caused by the middle class. The middle class, by and large, are consumers.
In order for the middle class to consume to the level that economic growth takes place, they must be paid a lot of money. And in order for that to happen, the businesses where they work must grow. The places where they are employed must do well. They must be making more. They must have more customers they're servicing. Whatever the enterprise is, it has to grow so that people working there earn more, get raises, get more benefits, and so that new people get hired.
This idea that the economy bubbles up from below is absurd.
That's what Obama's gonna sell, though. Obama is gonna sell "we've gotta take more money from the rich and we've gotta raise taxes on businesses and we gotta get that money to the middle class where it will cause the economy to grow." That's not how this happens.
You start taking money away -- just like the government takes from the private sector -- the private sector shrinks. You take money away from the rich and business owners and entrepreneurs, you get less of what they do, including employment.Limbaugh has some points correct, as far as how he asserts that the middle class is not "the source" of economic growth, as this is not possible. But he, just like the President who he is trying to criticize here, cannot see that it is not "the rich" or "the middle" who create conditions that result in economic growth, but it is rather the government sector that provides the increase in fiscal flows that provide the leading $NFA flows to the non-government sector that allows for increased consumption, savings and investment within that sector.
Close but no cigar Rush.
Both you and the President have it all wrong, and you both appear blind to our government's real fiscal authority.
Sadly, I used to think like Limbaugh UNTIL I learned how our disgusting money system works.
ReplyDeleteWhat Obama says bears no relation to what he does. Hence the payroll tax increase on the...
ReplyDeleteLimburger is unaware of the Lewis turning point, where a country either creates a middle class and goes on to become a developed country or fails to create middle class jobs and a vibrant consumer economy and slips into have v. have-not status, with a lot of glitter at the center of a town surrounded by slums. Or may his OK with America slipping backward.
ReplyDeleteThere are no producers without consumers. In other words, vis a vis our economic model, there is no economic recovery without consumers. With that in mind I'll turn George Gilder's dictum on its head: demand creates supply, not the other way around--or not to the degree Guilder purports..
ReplyDeleteSomeone should ask Rush to build a house from the top down, and the middle out, see how well that goes.
ReplyDeleteBoth Rush and Obama are ignoring the real solution of getting money to the poorest at the bottom, the reasons they both choose to do that are equally disgraceful, one is nothing more than a propagandist for excess wealth and the idle rich, always on the look out for some corporate welfare. The other is the same, but has to pander to the middle for votes, the future is all theirs, and the poor aren't invited.
Both sides of the mainstream are reeeeeaaally screwed up and have zero explanations or real solutions...
ReplyDeleteI still assert there are at most 1,000 of us globally who understand how the current system/arrangements are really supposed to operate...
rsp,
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete