Mon
Dec 20 2010
09:06 am

If you missed it, Jed Lewison provided a very nice chart of income growth and income equality/inequality during the Reagan, Clinton and Bush (43) years.

Note that growth under Clinton was the most equally distributed.

Now, I'm not an economist, so I can't say for sure that Jed's analysis is correct or not.

The thing that unites both Reagan and Bush, aside from their party? They were both supply-siders who cut taxes, especially on the top earners.

Clinton believed the demand side of the equation is important too, and he raised taxes, particularly on top earners. Some people like to call that class warfare, but guess who benefited? Everybody. Including the wealthiest Americans.

But, there was a very distinct outcome for people under these past president's when you look at the actual numbers.

I doubt that any of us can count on getting back on a track similar to the Clinton years after the Obama "tax deal" -- income inequality will look strikingly familiar to the Bush years, if not worse.

AttachmentSize
clintonbushreaganincome.png21.49 KB

style="display:block"
data-ad-format="autorelaxed"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-3296520478850753"
data-ad-slot="5999968558">

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Local .GOV

Wire Reports

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

Search and Archives