randy_byers: (Default)
[personal profile] randy_byers
E.J. Dionne makes the argument that the presidential election has become a referendum on trickle-down economics, with Obama making the case for progressive taxation and McCain calling that socialism. One of Obama's rhetorical tricks that I just love is his description of trickle-down as the theory that if you give more money to the wealthy, some of it will trickle down on the rest of us. To my ear, the usage "trickle down on" conjures an image of the wealthy pissing on the rest of us. I'm guessing that's the image it's intended to conjure.

Date: 2008-11-01 05:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kalimac.livejournal.com
The preposition "on" is not usually used by proponents of trickle-down economics. Perhaps because it does increase the force of that image. But yeah, that's the point: we're supposed to be content with their discards, their unwanted leavings, because in that system there's sure no incentive to give anything else.

Date: 2008-11-01 05:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com
I'm trying to think what preposition proponents of the theory do use. Is it "to"?

Date: 2008-11-01 05:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] holyoutlaw.livejournal.com
I don't think they do use a preposition. I think it's just trickle down. ("from"?)

Date: 2008-11-01 05:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com
"And then the wealth trickles down your leg!"

Date: 2008-11-01 06:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] holyoutlaw.livejournal.com
No matter how you clutch it,
no matter how you grab.
The last bit of wealth will always
trickle down your leg.

(This needs a synonym for "clutch" that rhymes with "leg." It's also a reference to "no matter how you jiggle/no matter how you dance/the last little drop will always/trickle down your pants." Maybe you were referring to it as well.)

Date: 2008-11-01 06:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com
Ha! No, I hadn't heard that one before. And it's so true!

Date: 2008-11-01 09:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maryread.livejournal.com
"You don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining!"

Courtesy of dear old dad.

Date: 2008-11-01 09:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maryread.livejournal.com
Also, every time I hear McCain say "socialist" I get hysterical about what exactly the Republicans think they've been doing with nationalizing the banks for the last month...

Date: 2008-11-01 09:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com
It's certainly one of the great ironies of our era that it's the laissez faire deregulators who have created our new socialist financial system. Perhaps it's like Nixon going to China.

Date: 2008-11-01 09:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maryread.livejournal.com
But they can't call it that. So either we don't speak of it, because economics is such hard stuff of course no one can be expected to break their poor heads about it, or we engage in orwellian newspeak, once they can come up with something to call it that sounds better than "bail-out" which was such a resounding failure of spin.

Date: 2008-11-02 12:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] don-fitch.livejournal.com
As I understand the situation, it's not socialism because:

It's not intended to improve the well-being of the members of society in general -- the American people.
(I might be over-simplifying a bit by thinking of "socialism" as having this aim, but it's as close as I can get.)

And

Mr. Paulson has been careful not to buy Voting Stock in those financial institutions, so the Goverment will have no control whatsoever over how the money is spent, what pay or bonuses the Officers of them receive, or (from this end) the policies the companies follow.

After all, the people handling this probably expect that in a few more months they'll be officially employed, again, by these firms, and they won't want to have their style cramped by interference by such a large stockholder. Meanwhile, they seem to be concentrating on getting as much of our National Treasury as possible into the right private hands before January twentieth.

(Whether the situation is that of a "partnership between Government and Business" -- as per the original definition of "Fascism" -- might be another matter.)

Date: 2008-11-01 09:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maryread.livejournal.com
And then that audience yesterday saying Uh-huh, uh-huh, when McCain was trying to make some quasi-argument about ~"people who make more than $250,000, and then people who make more than $200,000, and then people who make more than $150,000, you can see where this is heading!"~ LIKE ANY MORE THAN A FRACTION OF THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM ARE MAKING THAT MUCH, AND THOSE MOSTLY ON THE PODIUM!

which planet is McCain living on?

don't mind me, I'm just frothing at the mouth, nervous wreck, waiting for the whole thing to turn into an episode of 24 in its what third season...

Date: 2008-11-01 10:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com
Oh, do go on!

Horses and sparrows

Date: 2008-11-02 09:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] headgardener.livejournal.com
JK Galbraith explained the 'trickle down' theory as "if you feed enough oats to the horses, some of it comes out the other end for the sparrows." (I think in his 'The Culture of Affluence')

Re: Horses and sparrows

Date: 2008-11-02 03:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com
Tweet tweet!

Profile

randy_byers: (Default)
randy_byers

September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10 111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2025 12:37 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios