sad but all too true - so you have to ask why ...

[Dog Gone at Penigma]

Last edited Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:44 AM - Edit history (1)

some people still believe this stuff, under all the different names it has had, dating back to when it helped create the problems of the Gilded Age.

cross-posted from penigma.blogspot.com:

[ReRe]

1. Yeah, they always accuse thre 99% of comitting class warfare

Such cowards the democrats were... all the right had to do was call them a name or say BOO, such as "Librul", or accuse them of "class warfare", and the Dems would slink back to their corner and go-along-to-get-along. That was the point they lost their backbone. And THEN (when Clinton came along, the '90s) they felt that the only way they could win elections was by going right, acting like republicans. But most detrimental of all tacs was accusing the Dems of Class Warfare. That was quite a phenomenonal magic trick. All the time the wingers were accusing the Dems of class warfare, they were the ones who were perpetrating class warfare and redistributing wealth UPWARD!

[Dog Gone at Penigma]

2. I think it reflects economics illiteracy

When people learn that trickle down, horse and sparrow, and all the other names for it is at least a 19th century (if not older) idea that has a long history of failure, they are less willing to believe the right wing bullshit.

Otherwise to those who don't know any better, it just seems like two equally qualified groups having a difference of opinion, not a difference of fact, about the arcane and mysterious subject of economics.

It is a uniquely aspirational ignorance to assume that if someone is rich, they will use policy-making or legislating power to make the voter rich too, if they meekly fall in line and vote for them.

The solution is better and earlier teaching of real economics in our schools, and not crap right wing or tea-party revisionist propaganda, but in red states - like Texas - they have far too much influence on text book content and national curricula.