Hello:

Since the end of WW ll, there's been essentially two economic eras: the post war era where we grew a middle class, and the Reagan era where the middle class stopped getting ahead, and the wealthy got wealthier.

We now enter a third era. As I've mentioned in my posts of late, the Reagan years of "government IS the problem" are over. The numbers are in, and the idea is DEAD. It has been totally repudiated by the electorate. It resides only in the few Republicans left, and they're not giving up easily.

Do you get the magnitude of the change? Or, does this magnitude reside only in my head?

excon

I don't see it quite that way. Voters have a short memory. If things are going good today, that's how things will stay. If things go bad, the voters will vote for the opposite party no matter what the candidate says, promises, etc.

... and the cycle will start all over again...

"It resides only in the few Republicans left"

Still perpetuating this myth that the GOP is dead? We've only begun to fight.

I do sense the magnitude of change, how can you not sense the magnitude of a gazillion dollars in government spending?

We now enter a third era. As I've mentioned in my posts of late, the Reagan years of "government IS the problem" are over. The numbers are in, and the idea is DEAD. It has been totally repudiated by the electorate. It resides only in the few Republicans left, and they're not giving up easily.

Do you get the magnitude of the change? Or, does this magnitude reside only in my head?

excon

'Spreading the misery' will not work in the U.S. This will change quickly; mark my words.

Hello:

Since the end of WW ll, there's been essentially two economic eras: the post war era where we grew a middle class, and the Reagan era where the middle class stopped getting ahead, and the wealthy got wealthier.

We now enter a third era. As I've mentioned in my posts of late, the Reagan years of "government IS the problem" are over. The numbers are in, and the idea is DEAD. It has been totally repudiated by the electorate. It resides only in the few Republicans left, and they're not giving up easily.

Do you get the magnitude of the change? Or, does this magnitude reside only in my head?

excon

You only have to drive through older cities and towns to see that the opposite is true.

Compare the neighborhoods from the 40s, 50s, 60s even 70s, and you will see mostly ranch houses barely 1500 sq feet. Mind you, that was in an era when there was a larger percentage of nuclear families and thus more people per household.

Compare that to the suburban sprawl, the McMansion neighborhoods. The average house is larger and the average family is smaller. How is this possible if the middlclass is shrinking? COuld the middleclass actually be wealthier?


If you really want to talk about economic impact:
Look at the census numbers. The number one cause of poverty in the us, especially among children is - single parent hood.






G&P

Rasmussen Reports™: The Most Comprehensive Public Opinion Site. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/59_still_believe_government_is_the_problem)

The idea that socialism was synonymous with modernity ended with double digit inflation combined with double digit unemployment in the 1970s .

If giving 50% or more of your income, the fruit of your labor, to the state is not slavery, what percentage would be ?