No, it's here. Stagflation, economic crash with GDP propped up by money printing.
In Keynesian economics, economic growth is measured in GDP, and GDP is measured in dollars, so all you have to do to offset a shrinking GDP and economic recession is print lots and lots of dollars, generate lots of inflation, and then count the dollars you printed as GDP growth. They'll point to the stock market too, because stocks are where inflation goes in America, so it is apparent growth, but actually it's just inflation, because the rising stock prices are disassociated from any actual productivity.
You print the money, give it to your rich banker Wall Street Friends, who buy up stocks and commodities with that freshly printed money, and drive the prices of stock up...but that kind of GDP growth reflects nothing but a massive wealth transfer from the bottom to the top, because by the time that money reaches teh average person, all the prices in the economy have already adjusted to the new money supply, so average folks derive no benefit from it.
That's why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This "infrastructure bill" is a perfect example of how you make rich people richer and poor people poorer, and convince them that they aren't because just look at those stock markets and GDP!
And most people, who have no clue why the rich keep getting richer, cheer on every new money printing bill, thereby screwing themselves harder and harder, every time, and despite their personal pain, they allow themselves to believe what they are told, because the stock market is booming and GDP is going up, while they eat their Rahmen noodles and Kraft macaroni for dinner.
Yeah I got fired for jerking off in the bathroom and hitting on chicks. Well they don’t know if I was jerking off, but they had their suspicions iouns. I’m In the bathroom stall, The boss Was right on the other side of the door and I could look down and see his feet tapping away.they were just filling an opening
Great explanation. Fantastic, actually. One thing I would ask is your definition of "rich" and "poor". I ask that because I think the "rich" strata is deeper than most people realize when talking about them as you do above or at least it is deeper as it applies to people's ability to benefit from what you explained above.
There is a hump to get over. The way I tried to explain it to my kids is by talking about a snowball and a hill. Anyone in this country can become rich enough to partake in the "rich getting richer" if you do a few simple things early enough and for a long enough time. Anyone.
Of course, there will always be a lot of people that are "poor" and stay there, but in this country (at least for now) that is almost always because of the decisions they make.
I understood your point in the original post both because it is basic and I am an Econ major. I wrote my senior paper on the Carter presidency so, yeah...It doesn't really matter where you draw the line, it just so happens that rich people get the benefit of government spending, the vast bulk of it...anything that is not welfare or social security, essentially. The sort of people who have stock portfolios, and generate their income by way of capital gains, not payroll.
What matters is that when these folks at the top get teh money, they buy up assets and goods, at current prices. So the demand and reduction of supply of these things leads to a rise in prices. Then the second tier who sell assets and goods get the money, and they buy more things, thereby increasing demand and reducing supply further, and so on down the line. Each person or institution in that chain gets less purchasing power from that money as it reaches them, because the markets adapt to the new balance of money and goods as it works it's way down the chain. The last in that line, the wage workers, who live off paychecks, get 0 benefit because by the time the money falls to them, in the form of raises in their paychecks, the prices of everything have already gone up, from barrels of oil, to stocks, to lettuce and hamburger. They get no benefit, they just need more money to buy the same amount of stuff they did before, they never have new money with old prices to take advantage.
Think of it this way....if we are playing monopoly, and every time you pass Go, you get $200, and every time I pass go, I get $400 because Uncle Sam gave me $200 in economic stimulus, who wins? I do, of course, but there is no denying that the economic stimulus led to more houses and hotels, and higher property values when we are bidding on property. That extra money created measurable economic stimulus, but only one of us benefitted. When I land on your property, sure, you get some of that money, but I have already accumulated houses, hotels, and properties, which are now more scarce by the time you get that money. In the real world, that means higher property values, rising prices of housing, and so on....but I bought those things at the old prices, by the time you get that money, prices have already risen, and you still can't buy any more with the additional money than you could have with less money before the "economic stimulus".
It doesn't matter who you define rich and poor. What matters is where on the ladder between wage slaves and Wall Street you are...the higher on that ladder, the more you benefit from government spending, the lower you are, the less you benefit, except for the subsistance checks given to the bottom, which is free money, but enough to live on, not enough to invest and save and rise to higher rungs on the ladder, just enough to keep you alive and reasonably comfortable, so that you don't have any ambitions to climb the ladder, it's too hard, and so easy to just feed off the handouts and relax.
This is a lesson learned after WW1, when the Progressives introduced welfare for white widows so they could keep their homes, and their land, and their housemaids without a husband to earn and pay the bills, but what happened, was the widows lost all of their wealth instead, while the housemaids and blacks and immigrants worked hard and were becoming a middle class. This was immediately corrected when the government sent agents into the black communities to get them on welfare, thus shifting the apathy from the white widows to the blacks and immigrants, which halted their ascent to the middle class, for decades, and even a century later, remains true. Kill the need to work and build capital, and you kill the incentive. And you can do it with a veneer of altruism and faux sympathy. You can see the effect today, with the government unemployment bonuses....why work if you don't have to? No work means no accumulation of capital, in the form of savings and assets. Thus, you go nowhere, you remain at the bottom, dependent and apathetic.
If you want to verify any of this stuff, you have to do your own research, nobody will tell you.
For the last 100 years this is what the Dems have done and the sheep still believe them.High oil and gas prices hurt the poor and middle class the most.
These are the very same people that the Dems always say that they care about the most.
Implementing the Green New Deal will have a crushing effect on the poor and middle class, but the left doesn't care because they know better than the little people.