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
