It really amazes me how out of touch leaders can be in terms of the give and take - even perception. It's ridiculous not to tax the upper income brackets. This extra money is not needed. Obviously, Arnold. believes in the trickle down theory, but you know what, this isn't the way to do it - on the backs of only one group - the disadvantaged group. Scary ruthless country.
First, I didn't know that Arnold was cutting taxes. I thought he was only limiting spending.
As for tax cuts, the rich see it as their due. They won't/ don't relate to the poor and they are insistent that its the fault of the poor that they are poor. This attitude is so endemic to this country, its almost as American as apple pie. The irony is that Clinton showed them what is was like to balance the budget, generate nearly full employment, make the first major inroads in the welfare class and create the longest econ. expansion in this country's history. A minor recession coupled with the idiocy of the Bush administration has managed to undo much of what Clinton accomplished.
I wonder if this generates a backlash - what does one look like just before they occur? Can you sense one before it happens? Was the 60s a backlash and how did it start?
When I moved to CA in the late 80s, I saw a backlash. In the early 80s, Reagan had cut off funding for mental hospitals, some welfare, medical benefits etc, and suddenly, all these misfits were let onto the streets. Growing up I had never heard the word homeless. There were a few bums around but they were not that visible.
By the late 80s, there was a definite homeless population. That's the GOP's solution to a social problem. Meanwhile, Reagan's budgets continued to generate big deficits because all the $$$ he saved he put into the military. Such merde!
ted |
