"Choosing an economic policy that has been a proven failure is a bold and risky strategy "

[Coexist]

Please read this. The entire thing, not just this snip.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/14/economy.useconomicgrowth

President Bush has the worst record on job growth of any president since Herbert Hoover. The typical worker has seen her wages decline over the eight years of the Bush presidency, and she has seen none of the benefits of the period's productivity growth. In addition, tens of millions of homeowners are seeing the bulk of their wealth disappear in the housing crash.

This is the record senator John McCain has embraced by making Bush's tax cuts the centrepiece of his economic agenda. Choosing an economic policy that has been a proven failure is a bold and risky strategy in a presidential campaign, but McCain is betting that the media will be so incompetent that they will not notice. He may be right.

For example, last week National Public Radio (NPR) did a report on the tax cut proposals of McCain and senator Barack Obama. The report correctly told listeners that the McCain's proposals will give more money to the wealthy, while Obama's would give more money to the middle class.

However, after presenting a solid analysis of the distributional impact of the tax cut proposals, NPR decided to tell its listeners about the "big ideas" behind these two proposals. We were told that the big idea behind the Obama plan was "fairness", which could also be called "redistribution".

It was nice for NPR to tell its listeners what pejorative term can be used to describe the tax cut. I suppose it can also be called "socialism", "communism" or "Arthur", but NPR was good enough to stop at redistribution.

[NC_Nurse]

1. SO depressing.

:(

[panader0]

2. You can "redistribute" some of that wealth right here.

Not really. I don't want anything from anyone else. (Maybe a little health care) I just don't want the value of the money I earn to fall so fast.