I'm sick of supply-side econmics. Let's try demand-side.

[white_wolf]

Here is my plan to fix the economy. 1. raise taxes on the rich up to at least the Clinton levels, though honestly I'd prefer the Eisenhower levels for the top 1%. 2. Reinstate Tariffs on all goods made outside the US. 3. Until we get private sector employment fixed, reinstate a public works program and put people to work rebuilding our crumbing infrastructure. What do you all think? This is me being moderate, I dare you to ask me to get radical.

[Ed Suspicious]

1. Makes perfect sense to me.

[abelenkpe]

2. Totally agree! Nt

[Arctic Dave]

3. I've been trying the supply side economics so I could become a millionaire but

no one wants to buy my pond scum soda. After all, if I supply it, the demand will come.

[truedelphi]

23. Don't give up on pond scum so quickly, Artic Dave.

The age of bio-fuels from many sources is upon us, and sooner or later, someone will pay top dollar for your pond scum.

[Arctic Dave]

31. I think I will need a government bailout by then.

What's a supply side anti-gubmint patriot to do?

[midnight]

4. You have my vote... Now later when you have your radical draft ready... Show us..

[Canuckistanian]

5. Hear, hear

In fact, let's raise the taxes on the rich back to the most PRODUCTIVE era rates - the Eisenhower years.

[RKP5637]

6. Sure makes sense to me. It'll never fly, might fix something. We don't seem to

be into that anymore in the US. I would think rebuilding our crumbing infrastructure would have been a #1 priority by now.

To me your approach is a fair and moderate approach, but now just this stirs some into calling one radical, a socialist, a communist and more.

The dems need to pursue a really radical approach, shake things really up, then this as a fall back would be about right.

[white_wolf]

7. I have a very radical approach, but I'm still thinking working on it. nt

[RKP5637]

9. It'll be interesting to hear. The dems need to scare the crap out of the pubs, and

then let the pubs compromise. ... of course would have been better when we had everything. The system needs a good kick in the ass to get things moving.

[TheKentuckian]

33. The fact that we outright refuse to invest in our infrastructure should

scare the living shit out of people.

I don't get what the disconnect is. We're breaking down very literally. Well, more being dismantled to herald in the era of private services for the affluent and Mad Maxville for the peasants.

[FarLeftFist]

8. We really need to change the National conversation

To this type of modest proposal. I don't know who could even be against something like this, its a win/win situation for our economy, the American worker, AND our society.

[white_wolf]

10. Ahh, but it might hurt the rich

and as I'm sure you've heard they are the wealth creators, the producers, the ones who hold up the world. Blah, I'm going be sick just typing. News flash: Right wingers, it not supply that creates jobs, but demand! Also, it is not the rich who hold up the world,but the workers.

[Aerows]

19. #3 - Rebuilding our infrastructure

...is eventually going to not just be a good idea to put people back to work, but a necessity to prevent needless deaths. There are already people who have died because roads suddenly fell apart and bridges collapsed because they got too old. Big corporations use those roads to deliver their goods all over the country, so they need to be ponying up for them to be repaired like everyone else does.

Maybe they are hoping that if gas prices go high enough, we'll all quit using the roads and not realize how messed up some of our interstates and highways are. When a wealthy, white male conservative dies because the bridge he just crossed collapsed, then we'll see a lot of finger pointing and demands that something be done, despite the fact that they have blocked city construction projects that benefit everyone at every turn.

[Lugnut]

11. That works for me.

We were snookered by the supply-side voodoo.

[Ghost Dog]

12. This creates demand, thus jump-starting job creation, by making foreign goods too expensive

for Americans to afford.

Others around the world would have to follow suit, leading all to concentrate on developing and consolidating their domestic economies, with perhaps only vestiges of globalism (including, hopefully, communications) remaining.

If the possibly accompanying social unrest can be channeled in constructive directions, i'm sure this new kind of economic localism could be made to work - and, in fact, could be made to work in a way much more efficient and less harmful to the planet than at present.

[Sherman A1]

13. Not sure on the tariffs part and might tweak a bit

like cutting defense spending by 50%, removing the SS cap, Medicare for all, lowering the retirement age to 60 for full retirement with 55 being early out.

But, I agree overall!

[white_wolf]

15. I agree with most of your additions as well,

This post was simply for fixing the jobless problem we have so I didn't want to post things that weren't directly related to that.

[socialist_n_TN]

21. Knowing wolf that's probably closer to his RADICAL.....

agenda. :)

[white_wolf]

28. Everyone is all "lets be pragmatic and centrist"

This is me being moderate, pragmatic, and centrist. Seriously though, I don' think these proposal are that extreme at all, they have all happened before in this country.

[socialist_n_TN]

32. I agree. See my post #22........

You're original ideas are mainstream to the max. The LEAST we should do. The only place they're radical is with the political class.

[BzaDem]

14. I think 1 (Clinton levels, or even somewhat higher) and 3 are mostly uncontroversial throughout the

Democratic party.

Obama certainly supports them, as do the vast majority of elected Democrats. 2 is much more controversial -- even progressive economists like Krugman believes it would hurt (not help).

[white_wolf]

16. As I said I'd prefer Eishenhower levels, myself.

I'm not sure number 3 wouldn't be controversial, I haven't heard any elected democrats mention it.

[progressoid]

17. RADICAL!!

:) :thumbsup:

[Aerows]

18. Hear hear!

I absolutely, positively agree with #2. You want to call it protectionism? Good, we need to protect our citizens and our economy and our middle class. Tax goods made outside of the US. #1 - I say go with Eisenhower levels if we are going to continue with all of these wars for oil companies (because you will never convince me that isn't what all 4 of them - I'm including Libya and Pakistan - are about).

#3. is quickly becoming a necessity. Our infrastructure is rotting away beneath our feet in many states. I'd like to know how many bridge collapses Conservatives will accept until they decide it's not "welfare" but to protect "everybody's welfare" including their own.

[Randypiper]

20. And while we're a it

tax breaks to companies only AFTER they create an a job for an American, not before.

[bluestate10]

24. Try buying american made products. I was buying from a made in USA site

last weekend and stumbled across a company named MadeinUSAForeever.com that sells underwear. Since I am toying with switching to boxers from briefs, I purchased some of the company's boxers. Just got them today with a hand signed BOGs from the site's owner. The quality of the briefs looks high and their feel is soft and supple, I tried a pair on, the fit is perfect for me. The shorts have 8% Lycra in them and the guy that sells them may be a wingnut, but he is doing something that I think is important, down the line, his efforts are keeping americans employed. The site owner is doing what an american that wants to see his country men and women having a good shot at maintaining their dignity would do, I can overlook political differences if there are any. I look forward to testing the underwear to see if I can wear boxers. If the test goes well, I will buy more.

[socialist_n_TN]

22. All of this SHOULD be a given. It's NOT........

a radical proposal.

I'm actually looking FORWARD to the radical one. :)

[Dappleganger]

25. You'd certainly have my vote!

[Motown_Johnny]

26. I am with you on the basics, could tweak some details is all

I like the Clinton era tax rate for the people making over $250K/yr but I think there should be new higher tax rates for people making even more money.
I see no reason why people making hundreds of millions of dollars a year should pay the same rate as people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

I think Tariffs are a great idea. We could go on and on about the details on this one but I don't think they are one size fits all. Countries with stronger environmental laws and who treat their workers better should not need to pay the same rate as polluters and human rights abusers.

I am all for public works and see no reason to stop once the private sector is fixed. We should continue until we have an infrastructure system that is the envy of the world.

[white_wolf]

29. Good point.

Countries like China, India, and others like them should have very high rates, maybe even 100% so it cost the same for companies to make them there as they do here. As for our infrastructure can we make our interstate system into something like the Autobon? No speed limits sounds fun, and I actually hear they are safer than ours.

[Motown_Johnny]

30. I was thinking light rail instead of an Autobahn

I would like to see a viable alternative to short plane trips as well as long car trips and possibly even long haul trucking.

I think light rail is a good start.

Also things like our power grid, water and sewage systems, bike and walking paths and high speed internet access.


Not that our roads don't need work too, they do.

[fascisthunter]

27. I agree