It really is just that simple, other than making sure one does get out to vote in every election - and the austerity imposed upon Americans by the republican hasn't cost your job in the first place - that is.
In last night's 8 year anniversary for Open Thread of Night Owls is this story posted a few months ago - Saturday, Mar 28, 2015. It is one of a huge body of work that I will do my best to provide as many links to as possible
Based on years of study from a wide range of expert sources are the facts laid out clear as it gets.
note: I'm stripping this piece down to the bare minimum to focus on the data via links.
The economy is a Democrat: Why recent history shows the value of a progressive president | When Dems control the White House, the middle class wins. And under Republicans? Not so much... by Sean McElwee
Bryan Dettrey and Harvey D. Palmer:
♦..covering the 60-year period from January 1951 to December 2010. They find that once economic growth increases above 1 percent a year — and it does so over most of the period they studied — “the average level of unemployment is significantly higher under Republican administrations.”
[...]
♦ Democrats reduce unemployment dramatically during periods of GDP growth compared to Republicans.
Larry Bartels:
♦ “Democratic presidents have produced slightly more income growth for poor families than for rich families.” - he then updated that finding using the latest data with the same result. Interestingly the actual value (purchasing power) of the minimum wage increased16 cents a year under Democrats, but decreased by 6 cents a year under Republicans
Douglas Hibbs in a ground breaking study found:
♦ ..that “the unemployment rate was driven downward by Democratic and Labor administrations and upward by Republican and Conservative governments.”
Alan Blinder and Mark Watson
♦ ..found that the economy grows faster under Democrats
♦ It could be that the safety net boosts entrepreneurship by making Americans feel more economically secure (and willing to take risks).
Christopher Witko and Nathan Kelly (pdf):
♦ ..note that “since the Republican takeover of Congress in 1995, the states have played a more important role in shaping the income distribution,” and, consequently, in driving income inequality.
Elizabeth Rigby and Megan Hatch:
♦ ..find that “policies played a significant role in shaping income inequality in the states.” If states had adopted more liberal policies, Rigby and Hatch suggest, the increase in inequality (as measured by the Gini Coefficient) would have been 60 percent smaller — and the share going to the top 1 percent would have been halved.
♦ “We observe that when unions are stronger and left party governments are in power at either the federal or state level we see lower levels of inequality.”
Anne Case and Timothy Besley (pdf) site the social safety net as reducing inequality:
♦ Democrats boost government spending, particularly on workers’ compensation and Medicaid
Zoltan Hajnal and Jeremy Horowitz:
♦ ..that people fare far better under Democrats than Republicans
♦ [harmful "conservative" policies]..end up having a disproportionate impact on [black and Latino Americans]
Anthony Atkinson and Andrew Leigh (pdf) on tax cuts for the rich/corporations:
♦ find that reductions in tax rates explain between one half and one third of the rising share of income going to the 1 percent in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the U.K. and the U.S
Olivier Bargain (pdf):
♦ tax policy accounted for at least 29 percent of the increase in inequality between 1979 and 2007, and likely more. Further, they find, “Republican policymakers increased inequality especially at the top whereas Democrats increased the income share of the bottom 80 percent of the distribution.”
Why do republicans steal the language and ideals of progressive Dems and mouth the words, pretending to care for the middle class American? (pdf):
♦ when people don’t perceive large differences between the parties, they are less likely to vote; and when people become alienated from the political process, they are less likely to vote.
In contrast David Brockington argues:
♦ “choice-rich environments” increase the probability that people will turn out to vote.
The importance of facts and being informed:
♦ ..when voters gain more information, they shift to support more liberal policies and parties.
If everyone voted progressive would win:
♦ ..much of the problem rests in the fact that low-income and middle-income voters don’t realize that conservatives are fleecing them.
In contrast:(pdf):
♦ The rich do realize they benefit from Republicans, and therefore have an incentive to turn out.
For more links to information are 5 diaries I've posted in the past:
♦ The main thrust of this diary is how the GOP pretends to care about a progressive goal of tight labor markets - Iow's more jobs - by labeling corporate written laws as "job creating" measures - and demanding of Dems what the GOP is actually scuttling
♦ This covers the republican tactic of blurring any difference in progressive vs "conservatives" policies and goals - the result - voter apathy, and less voter participation at the polling booth where it counts- and advantage for republican
♦ Here modern monetary policy is highlighted with excellent work from Dr. Stephanie Kelton, L Randall Wray, Harry Shearer hosting; a dissertation/video presentation and wonderful example of an expert taking on a complex issue of MMT (modern monetary theory) and bringing it into clear understandable focus - It is excellent work by Dr. Stephanie Kelton - also a thorough debunking of most every part of the supply side/trickle down GOP farcical agenda
♦ Tax policies, The Powell memo: a corporate blueprint to dominate democracy by a tiny elite corporate minority is the focus. With a debunking of the "redistribution" myth that is actually "pre distribution" to the top - policies of the GOP heavily favoring capital over labor.
♦ This last covers the enormity of the wealth gap in America and that most people are unaware of just how vast it really is. With examples of the long Con
The result of this long term GOP deception?
Wealth and income disparity has grown to a size not seen since the last great depression, and most people are unaware of just how bad it is. It has been studied (pdf). People when questioned do not believe, for instance that 1% elite have captured nearly half of the wealth in this country and control a far higher percentage of financial assets, a reported $32 trillion of which are stashed off shore to evade taxes; or that Wall Street’s 2013 Bonuses Were More Than All Workers Earned Making the Federal Minimum
It is also why the GOP has spent decades demonizing Unions: As Union Membership Has Declined, Income Inequality Has Skyrocketed In The United States
In my
opinion, while the social injustices perpetrated by the republican are the more egregious assault on people because of their more immediate
causes of
death, these facts about the economics which cannot be considered a separate phenomenon are mightily important too
(again imo).
The choice couldn't be more plain - the value of a progressive agenda obtained in our local and state representation and a President that will stand with the people
Just imagine this as the norm: counter-cyclical social budgets that kicked into action as OECD recommends (with excellent video) that are permanently in place and responded accordingly to whenever there is the need for added job opportunities:
When the number of jobseekers grows during a downturn, governments should ensure adequate resources for public employment services and benefit and programme administration as these services act as “gateways” to activation programmes.
For example, Australia, Denmark and Switzerland automatically adjust budgets for active labour market policies in line with labour market conditions
No more loose labor markets for corporations to exploit. Preying on workers. Pitting one against another resulting in increased downward pressure on wage rates just as the republicans shilling for their corpo paymasters have been directed to do. It is foundational to the "conservative" movement - and that is NOT my opinion.
That is fact
Instead we the people make corporations compete for our labor at our price.
note: This diary is admittedly not much good for the reading of it so much as a compilation of links to some of the most deeply researched information and exhaustive studies. If more people were aware of what their vote meant and how vital to the shaping of their own future, I'm convinced that we all would reverse the direction in this country back to a more egalitarian purpose. A government of the people by the people for the people -
plant, animal, and earth type persons - that is
And as has been pointed out, the more people know, the higher the voter turnout - Progressives win and the "conservatives" will lose.
- thanks for stopping by