Economy
Related: About this forumThe Real Villain Behind Our New Gilded Age
*In the past two decades, growth rates in the United States have fallen to half of what they were in the middle of the 20th century. The share of income accruing to the top 1 percent has nearly doubled since the 1970s, while the share of income going to all workers has fallen by nearly 10 percent.
These are the marks of our new Gilded Age. Its tempting to blame impersonal market forces such as globalization and automation for widening inequality. But the true villain would be familiar to anyone who lived through the previous one: market (that is, monopoly) power. . .
The era of supply-side economics championed by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher which called for tax cuts, deregulation and narrow antitrust enforcement explains a lot of our current predicament. The key assumption of that era was that markets work best when the government focuses exclusively on enforcing contract and property rights.
This theory turned out to be wrong not because it celebrates the market but because it misunderstands it. Two centuries earlier, Adam Smith pointed out that the easiest way for businesses to earn profits is not by slashing costs and innovating but by agreeing among themselves not to compete to exert market power to raise prices or lower wages.'>>>
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/opinion/monopoly-power-new-gilded-age.html?
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Economic and social ills which I truly believe are linked to the new Gilded Age. Something I figured out was happening in the 1980s when they were creating this mess.
Lonestarblue
(9,971 posts)Reagan was the beginning of the policies that started destroying the middle class and moving the countrys wealth to the top few. I remember that presidency well, and I still have a book that I should probably reread (as if I dont have enough to make me angry these days 😠 , The Politics of Rich and Poor, Wealth and the American Electorate in the Reagan Aftermath, by Kevin Phillips and published in 1990. Reagan did a lot of damage, especially to the poor, and subsequent Republican presidents have kept up the onslaught. Ive always thought Reagan was a closet racist, but Nixon carried racist policies even further with the Southern Strategy and the War on Drugs. Every Republican presidential candidate to date has carried the Reagan torch and pushed the same old disasterous economic policies. But so far Republicans have won the social/culture war. Thats what keeps getting them elected.
I remember it all too well.
PaulX2
(2,032 posts)We're screwed every way to Sunday.
knightmaar
(748 posts)The era of supply-side economics ... does not explain anything relevant to this article. "Supply side economics" refers to giving large tax breaks to corporations on the expectation that they will get larger and hire more people.
That has nothing to do with the assumption that the free market will prevail. Those just happen to be two orthogonal beliefs held by certain groups of people. (Reagan may have believed both, but Bush the first called supply-side economics "voodoo"
The Adam Smith quote refers to anti-trust, which has very little to do with "free market philosophy" and nothing to do with supply-side economics.
pecosbob
(7,534 posts)...that means me, too. A whole generation decided it was okay to outsource their moral responsibilities as long as they made a buck.
elleng
(130,864 posts)supported virtually nothing reagan did.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I refuse to blame an entire generation of folks who for the most part tried to play by the rules and just get through the day. This was organized theft by Ronald Reagan and his playmates.
KPN
(15,642 posts)It is not. The data clearly show, and have shown for decades now, that supply side economics is an abysmal failure in terms of jobs, wages, and widely shared prosperity. The benefits of supply side accrue to the wealthy capitalist as opposed to the working class. ... It's all just a heaping pile of steaming bullshit that apparently too many voters are too brainwashed to see.