Trickle up
A quarter-century ago, I and other members of Bill Clinton’s cabinet urged him to reject the Republican proposal to end welfare. It was too punitive, we said, subjecting poor Americans to deep and abiding poverty. But Clinton’s political advisers warned that unless he went along, he would jeopardize his reelection.
And obviously his reelection was more important than keeping people out of deep and abiding poverty.
That was the end of welfare as we knew it. As Clinton boasted in his State of the Union address to Congress that year: “The era of big government is over.”
Until Thursday, that is. Joe Biden signed into law the biggest expansion of government assistance since the 1960s – a guaranteed income for most families with children, raising the maximum benefit by up to 80% per child.
Yet Biden was one of those “big government is over” Democrats back then; he was one of the most conservative Dems.
By the time Clinton campaigned for president, “ending welfare as we knew it” had become a talisman of so-called New Democrats, even though there was little or no evidence that welfare benefits discouraged the unemployed from taking jobs. (In Britain, enlarged child benefits actually increased employment among single mothers.)
But along came Covid and walloped everyone except the super-rich, who got super-richer.
The economic lesson is that Reaganomics is officially dead. For years, conservative economists argued that tax cuts for the rich create job-creating investments, while assistance to the poor creates dependency. Rubbish.
Bidenomics is exactly the reverse: Give cash to the bottom two-thirds and their purchasing power will drive growth for everyone. This is far more plausible. We’ll learn how much in coming months.
While more people get vaccinated.
Reaganomics will never be dead. Drive a stake through its heart, cut off its head, it won’t matter. There will always be acolytes and devotees ready to chant the incantations and burn the tana leaves to bring its stiffened, dessicated corpse back to life. They will always have wealthy, influential backers to support their efforts, because these patrons will always need more money to paper their walls, stuff their pillows and gild their toilets.
Yes, I know I’m mixing two classic horror monsters here. Deal.
What’s the expression? That’s like being the thinnest kid at fat camp?
Reaganomics and screwing over the middle and lower classes have been such longstanding policy with such overwhelming bipartisan support (in practice if not rhetoric) that any departure from that mode, no matter how slight, is viewed as a radical sea change.