See the trouble?
One of the frustrating things about being a progressive is endlessly contending with the seemingly unslayable myth of Reaganomics. Empirics be damned, conservatives have convinced many Americans that cutting the government will lead to prosperity for all. Supply-side economists promise that public welfare programs for the wealthy (various tax loopholes, shelters, etc) will eventually be better for everyone. Cut taxes and the benefits “trickle down!”
There’s little evidence that this actually works. It’s bad economic policy and (even worse?) bad fiscal policy. But hey—type “cut taxes” into Google and it suggests that tax cuts pay for themselves and that defense spending is unrelated to revenue streams. Reaganomics retains its thirty year grip on American public debates over the role and scope of government.
Enter Michigan Republican Clark Durant, a candidate running for the 2012 GOP nomination against Sen. Debbie Stabenow. After arguing strenuously for less government spending…
In regards to the Occupy Wall Street movement, Durant said the protesters should “go find a job.” In regards to the wealth gap the movement decries, Durant said, “I think it should be wider.”
This is serious conservative rhetorical innovation (or just honesty, at long last). This is a serious, mainstream Republican (he’s been endorsed by a number of Michigan’s establishment GOP) claiming/admitting that tax cuts and stripped-down government uniquely benefit the wealthy. Reaganomics exacerbates wealth inequality. Write that down!
Then again, he went on to say…
“Does anybody think Steve Jobs should not be (sic) in the 1 percent? He made life better for the 99 percent of the rest of us. You want to create opportunities for people with their unique gifts,” he said. “They have created value and wealth.”
Sigh.
I like the short performances I’ve seen Rachel Maddow and others doing depicting the important role government must play, since companies and corporations do focus on the profit angle almost exclusively. Clean air and water, safe, comfortable, efficient roads and bridges – Such projects must be organized by governments.
It’s sad that not a one of the Republican candidates for President on any of the debate stages so far would dare to be courageous enough to admit that government had a use. It’s sort of like admitting that one needs fat in a balanced diet.
Posted by Stephen Robert Tod | November 11, 2011, 9:11 pm