Maybe it is. Maybe, we just dont have enough people going out to work and paying their share. The figures used are something like 50% that get aid.
This number of course includes retired people which accounts for around 20%. It also includes seriously disabled, single mothers and fathers, and many others in this economy that simply might not be able to feed their children without that assistance. Maybe letting those groups of people starve and die, actually would make for a better economy mathematically, and if that is the actual plan, its actually at least more viable, than suggesting they need to work more to solve our current economic problems.
So, is the economic theory, that: We can send 60 and 70 year olds out to really produce quite a bit more, and that their taxes will help us grow?
And that single Moms and low income people can go out and get more jobs and that will help us grow and make for a better economy?
Certainly, to some degree, more would theoretically get done, so it is possible.
Simultaneously, the plan seems to be to fire as many teachers, police and firemen as absolutely possible to maybe just above the line of negligence in some cases, to save money.
So, we want to fire people, we want more people to go to work. Now, within the constructs of Supply and Demand, there will be a massively increased supply of labor, which means the price of that labor will absolutely be forced down.
If the price of labor is forced down on the lower levels, it translates to lower price of labor at the ones just above it as well, and this will increase through the ladder of wages, so that the majority of normal people with normal jobs, will essentially become worth less.
Is this really the plan for a better economy? To lower the buying power of most of the USA? Can you not see it is a simple matter of basic math that by doing this, your life will not be better, but actually will be worse?
There is one segment of people that will benefit however, and those are the owners of businesses, because labor will be cheaper, and they could theoretically make more with lower labor rates, which is great. Except for one thing....as people make less, they will buy less, and as they buy less, things become worth less because there is less demand, not factoring in economies of scale which is another issue, and not necessary for this line of reasoning.
So, we want more workers, in an economy that has a high unemployment rate, so that incomes across the normal board will drop, necessarily? We want less buying power for nearly the entire USA, because the wages will be lower, and that will far outweigh any theoretical increase in people working, because to think a 62 year old is going to get some great job and start buying Ferraris is probably not realistic, especially if his labor rate is slashed below what it is now?
Now, perhaps that really is the problem. Maybe if we all go out and work more, and earn less, the economy will be much better than it is. But I ask, for who?
I think for who is obvious, and the numbers show it conclusively. In the 2000's the average income for the massive majority of Americans was increasing at maybe 5%. For those at the upper level it was 100%. These are estimates, and I have not defined the groups well, because its off the top of my head, but they are accurate enough for the purpose of just showing a little more direct math and how it affects the economy.
Essentially, the resources trickled/waterfalled up, and now we are in an economy where many do not have enough to consume, and generate more need for commerce. Sure, the upper .5% has plenty to consume, but they absolutely do not need to spend any of that, because their income is realistically, all discretionary.
So, how do we fix this?
Again, do we really flood the economy with more workers and decrease the labor value of nearly every American, while simultaneously eliminating useful jobs that contribute to the economy in a very real way like teachers, cops and firefighters? Does anyone with a meager understanding of economics think this is actually possible? Further, since the past has shown conclusively that while cutting the tax rate for that higher income bracket, their income will increase, but the income of the rest of Americans will not in any real way.
Is that really the solution for a "better" America? Do you really think this will make your life better? Do you really think the math of that situation, could even remotely possibly work?
Is it a surprise that a decrease in tax for the population of people making the most, has directly resulted in one of the worst economies we have seen in 80 years? Is the tax break the whole problem? Of course not, but it definitely has taken money out of the economy, and is certainly part of it.
If the tax breaks were instead given to the middle income earners, that money would have flooded the economy, and not been skimmed off the top, often to be sat on, or invested overseas. If the massive grants given to massive corporations including some of the most profitable in the entire world were instead invested on making the country itself better, and letting the record profits of those corporations to be used for investing in their businesses, again that money would have flooded the economy and not been fleeced out of it.
The economy is a complex system, and I am hardly suggesting I have it all figured out. However, there are some very basic principles that do apply to any economy and supply and demand is perhaps one of the most basic. Further, as with crime, when trying to cut costs, and raise revenue, its best to follow the money. Its simply a matter of basic math. 90% of the money is in one place, and the economy is failing. Trying to fix the segment of the economy that maybe has holds nearly no real percentage of it, is without a doubt, worthwhile if there is waste, however, it can't possibly fix, or realistically even influence the greater problems in the economy.
Its a red herring, and taking away the red herrings for them to eat, wont make your life better. Follow the money. Follow the math, and follow your instincts. Don't be fooled, because almost everyone understands these principles on a basic level, but if we get distracted and are given a group to hate, we often lose focus, and ignore the logic that we all understand on a basic level.
What will make this countries economy do better? What would happen to your income if 10 million more workers joined the work force tomorrow? 20 million? 100 million? Do you honestly think this would help you and your family? Do you honestly think the people living in poverty are this country's biggest problem, or is that poverty a symptom of the actual problem, and hardly the problem itself?
The economy is a bad economy because there is not enough money in the economy. Many things must be changed including reducing waste, penalizing offenders, and insuring people are paying their fair share. Stop listening to your party line and incorporating it into your philosophy. Actually take a second to really think about what is happening, how we got where we are, and simply don't take the easy way out, and believe the news reports at face value, because they all have an agenda, and it is almost certainly not aimed at making your life better.
Its a damn shame so many hard working people are fighting so much with each other, over a great country that we have all helped build. And in the end, it is only happening because of greed, and if you step outside of it, and stop listening to just one side, perhaps you will see that too. Perhaps.
