so every once in a while you'll hear about problems talking about
trickle-down economics at the
of worry when the rich to I you'd do well
except for when you don't which is happens to be over the last four decades
or so
so Stanford center on poverty inequality did an interesting graph it I want to
scare you with
it I mean for me with so
first live show you a graph it his share our income now they say look
don't worry it when the rich get richer so so will you
now you see the charts there if you can see raided 0
yet is a little hard to see right it's right where all the lines begin
okay and and that's throughout time so that's all back in 1968
so actually income inequality not so bad for actually a good stretch a time
and then you see separating right around what do I tell you every grab separates
right around 1978
okay after the two critical Supreme Court decisions
and what happens well the top twenty percent that's the top chart align their
starts getting in disproportionate share of the income
and no they trickled have a right on top of our heads
and a bottom eighty percent see their share of income
start to head down down down down
2140 a sickly helps dead
and they're great claim to fame is that they're not right
I'll hop 2340 right that's right yet and then
from forty on down yes plummeting a 21- 248
how to gained yet they just bears hey there its data flows data flow to better
understand what your liberal problem is with this chart
I mean I don't know why you guys wanna beat up on people for being successful
her to stand but but the problem is that's not be everybody in america
spires to be wealthy and do well the people who do well we should try to tear
them down and
now this is in a straw man argument but
young man listening to that show left right and center and that's that guy
from my
met rich Lowry for always make that argument
radio says that whenever they bring up income inequality on that show
the talking point on the right is always is always up well we don't deal with in
america we all want to be wealthy we don't
disparage people for bro succeeding and that's a total straw man argument that's
not what we're talking about
we're talking about if you take a look at the entire economy
that it's not working out for the most people anymore to the way with
structured
are kinda that's another thing people though we have free markets as the free
market's drop out the evidence could from Jesus and back
we in bed markets right and market that it serves people
not the other way around which is what they have it set up now now they have
that people serving the markets which is not the way it's supposed to be
that's what this is right right so a got so what i was gonna that that is that
one of the reasons that this income inequality has at
gotten worse is because but the rules to Jimmy's point it's not
this stuff doesn't just come to fall down about him so we make laws
so one other things we've done lots forty years is reduced the taxes
the top one percent the top 10 percent pay so when you reduce those taxes
well their share of the income goes up now the old days the you had
you know you take someone that and then you would put into schools you would put
it into your community
so that everyone will have an equal opportunity right
but now aka and we and they don't need opportunity let me let me just keep the
money right
but or use a rule saying okay now the bank's we need
change the law so the banks can now gamble
with the depositor money so is your money and their house was take risks
with it
but they're gonna okay they're gonna gamble with a day to keep the what
exactly you mean to you
okay not is not as it turns out as you and I being gamblers
now really gambling yet cuz reply with other people's money right now there's
no risk if you lose it
that's right and that's why they gamble more that's why we had the crash in 2008
so these are actual rules passed by human beings passed by our politicians
who were of course
given campaign contributions by the guys who passed who who got
it ranges from those laws that's the chart now don't think they'll say is
what look wait a minute as a percentage of income
okay as a share of income so it's not wrong come well I got the wrong come
numbers for you
number one US ways this is in 2012 over half a US wage earners
made less than thirty thousand dollars a year had to use a
is that amazing the Yukon Tex the federal poverty line for a family of
five
is 27,000 ten dollars okay
so they're not that far to family but they're not that far from the poverty
line
perhaps in the US wage-earners and I get there so people don't see that as a
problem with aren't
overall economy people keep looking at the economy
as an individual problems that have a societal problem
when we r outsourcing jobs by the tens of thousands
that's not an individual problem that's a societal problem
that we need to have a societal responses to but republicans and with
the right-wing conservative
and corporatist will say that you need to is rely on yourself
John Elway's gonna say police about we're gonna give the opportunity to work
no
but the structure of the system is now crony capitalism
and it's impossible half the country is making less than thirty thousand dollars
and we're proud of our economic system that's unbelievable so how much is just
messaging then because I think the conservative message when they say well
at the rich get richer than they'll buy a yacht man who gets helped with the guy
who built the yacht and then the guy who puts the planning in the yacht
a bottle and that somehow sounds good but I think people don't understand
is that the rich the ultra-rich just had money making money it's it like separate
money from the system
it had nothing to do with the money that you hire a contractor to build something
or to put in your TV is just money that's just being generated more and
more
but I don't think progressives have a re: have a simple
argument against that like something that's just like oh well I build a hot
min so I pay someone and then we're here to let me go to middle class I want the
other one like
yeah of course because you it here's what it would work if then you started a
company and hired fifteen hundred people and paid them a living wage and let them
for you get
yeah email like that would be it like a yacht yes
six guys build the yacht the stale the upper twenty five years
you know a good up there you know that this is a
and the other one is just simply its ally
and it doesn't work like that's how simple you make the argument it's a lie
and it doesn't work it helps no one they keep their money yet let's experiment
need be
other this simple line there don't progress if need be
an trua shot of it I had okay Mitt Romney
conservatively has at least for $250 million dollars let's say he spends like
crazy which he doesn't
but let's say he did well he has a car elevator mercedes-benz at most probably
about five million dollars a year
right that means there's 245 million dollars that
isn't going back into the economy it's a sitting literally Cayman Islands bank
account very striking that's there they can't spend it they can lay
they started back in business where his Brewster's Millions right could not
spend that amount of money in a month
with so to give you a sensible how
it makes a difference so if you increase taxes on Mitt Romney
well you get a little bit back into that and it's not too bad because we don't
like Mitt Romney it's not
to do a good to it is clear with we don't like the rich no
would then you'd some that money goes back into the community to build bridges
to build infrastructure
its center which helps because we need roads that ambulances need to go on and
people eat a new transportation for their businesses et cetera
and you need to create jobs rate that but if you increased taxes
on the poor and the middle class like for example to a sales tax
what happens that is well okay you're taking that money
how the economy that they definitely would have spent because they spend
a hundred percent of their income because they don't have the money to
save
they gotta put in the red to go to get food to go to go to school
so you're taking money out the economy whereas be when you take it
from a guy like Mitt Romney it is not a matter taking it when you do
something that helps a community it goes back into their car and ended
and it go back to what worked in during the
to bring us out at the depression is because those guys are gonna start
businesses a few of them do
and God bless the ones who did right but the people who can hire
1500 people in the town three thousand people in town
50,000 people overall 100 130 is the government
they can do it so what you want done with that money and they're going to
build bridges
and the United contractors to build bridges but would you want them to do
is that why we want it that's to me what Rediffusion well this
they start businesses they start projects that hire people that the only
people who can do it
no one else is going to do it we'd as you just said dade they just said on the
money
so if this was explained in the TED talk that got banned
and it was my millionaire he talked about how supply-side economics doesn't
work any talked about
it's much better to have 10,000 workers go on by 10,000 cars
than the give all that money to me cuz I'm looking to buy two or three cars a
year
money to buy two or three pairs of jeans I but most people so the money is
stagnant exactly what check assaying
the money just sits there and what actually creates jobs demand in the
economy
so consumers really other people who create
jobs writers you can just open it back to inspect buildings shit
and start selling it nobody wants it so it's a symbiotic relationship
right between consumers and producers
that create jobs it's not well they're not
job creators that if they did it well it put it this way
if they were if if giving people like Mitt Romney all the money if you look at
that chart
if that we really did trickle down economics for we be drowning in jobs
right now
and we're not drowning in jobs and here's one more to that absent on the
show before I like to say the stack as its overwhelming
David Stockman said this that he was but the budget director for ronald reagan
that before nineteen eighty the upper by percent abut murders in america
I had accumulated up
a budget a trillion dollars right after sense
they have now King egg cream related 40 trillion dollars since 1980
that is more money than the entire human Grace had created
prior to 1980 they've accumulated sense that's a real statistic
so let me give this stats on the top 10 percent
add to your contacts as well US way citizens in 2012
top ten percent of US wage earners to comb more than half
other countries total income okay so
now you might say well that took top 10 percent or the richest okay that's right
that makes s
should the are they gonna get only temp something come no of course him with a
temp something come to top 10 percent in terms of wealth and income
but 50 percent is record-breaking thats gigantic that this proportionate
so go back to the for scrap that I put up for a second because people say well
what can you do that sir or
it's always been the case right but wait a minute it actually hasn't always been
the case
1868 thats 1968 1968 to 1978
it was the case at all we changed the rules in 1978
that's when is seventy six or seven either too critical Supreme Court
decisions
that say that corporations can spend money in politics
and that from then on corporations windup
dominating politics changing all rules on their be happen in their favor
the top 10 percent take off the red service had a