Business, Center for American Progress, climate change hoax, Cloward–Piven strategy, Communist infiltration, current-events, economic exploitation, economy, elections, government, History, middle-out economic experimentation, Obamacare, politics, progressive totalitarianism, social engineering, Statism
The Real Cost of Utopian Schemes – “A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.”
CLINTON: “So what I am proposing is that we invest from the middle out and the ground up, not the top down.”
Clinton’s middle-out economic experimentation is what the media should be harping on. First thing there is no evidence middle-out has ever worked, anywhere. No state, no other country. Next, there are fewer Americans in middle class due to this approach by the last President. The media is obviously too wrapped up in diminishing Trump to fact-check middle-out economics.
Why are there no fact-checks? We just got to take Clinton’s word because she said it? How many reporters are reporting on the same topic? No one gets out of the box to put the American People first?
Middle-out is just another liberal Utopia. Economist may be able to observe middle-out growth in an economy after it happens, but to say you can grow an economy from the middle-out is experimental and never been proven. The middle class first need jobs to be middle class.
We need massive economic growth. Simply put, the more you take from the private sector the smaller the private sector. Doesn’t matter if your Clinton or Obama. Government had record year-over-year revenues to the Treasury with lower rates, and that can be proven. And the best costumer for a small business is a big business. What small business wouldn’t want an order from big business?
I suppose I should keep my response short, but I’m afraid after this post middle-out economics won’t be discussed before the election. And look at unemployment number this Democrat President gets, as much as they want the unemployment number to reflect a great economy, it’s been devastating for many, too many.
I’ve waited all week for an article, but none really, a couple of old ones from Obama’s campaign rhetoric days. So I’ve had to post debate transcript instead. Clinton wants to impose a Nationalize Utopian economic growth strategy that’s never been proven to work and not one report in the news.
What economist say’s middle-out growth works? The same economist that says government stimulus will cause more economic growth? When are the media going to challenge any economist to discuss if middle-out growth is an observation or a growth strategy?
You can’t predict economic growth just because tax code is more favorable to people in middle income situations. What if, as is now happening, the middle class just keeps getting smaller? How can any Democrat be ahead when their economic ideas are just experimental and never proven to work? Can’t Republicans at least win that argument? Oh, the press wouldn’t report it if they did…
[Byline Son House]
22 October 2016
Flashback November 20, 2012:
‘Middle-out’ economics trumped ‘trickle-down’ on Nov. 6 – Now policies should reflect that
Note the source: Byline David Madland, Center for American Progress via The Hill
In reading this old article never any evidence, always a poll that says middle-out economics works, and a claim the public agrees with what economist have been saying…Which economist? Someone working for a democrat campaign?
As for Utopian Schemes: