Hack, please imagine that the "pie" is 7% bigger next year. That is roughly $ 1.25 TRILLION bigger. Any growth we have now (1.5%) almost all goes to the top 20%. And I've argued even that tiny growth is vastly overstated because spending on things like the EPA are counted as "contrubutors" to GDP when history will show they actually stymie the economy with regulations ( the $1.9 T we have talked about previously)
Not sure your point here. You seem to be making mine, which is that growth in and of itself isn't what we ought to be looking at. The first question is ``for whom?'' The second is ``at what cost''? One could use lax regulation to shift costs from the corporate balance sheet to the public one, in the form of messes to be cleaned up later or public goods impaired that must be replaced. You could grow the economy by reviving the coal industry, at a cost of economic growth opportunities destroyed in the future. But I agree with you that what growth we get under Trump isn't likely to significantly benefit anyone middle-class on down.
Not sure your point here. You seem to be making mine, which is that growth in and of itself isn't what we ought to be looking at. The first question is ``for whom?'' The second is ``at what cost''? One could use lax regulation to shift costs from the corporate balance sheet to the public one, in the form of messes to be cleaned up later or public goods impaired that must be replaced. You could grow the economy by reviving the coal industry, at a cost of economic growth opportunities destroyed in the future. But I agree with you that what growth we get under Trump isn't likely to significantly benefit anyone middle-class on down.
Comment