From Ronald Reagan's "trickle down economics"

To the decline of unions (spearheaded by Ronnie)

To Bush's Tax Cuts

To Quantitative Easing (Obama was on board with it, but Ben Bernanke decided to use it because Congress (where the House was Republican Controlled) "wasn't doing anything to help"

"They argued that quantitative easing would only encourage risky lending without creating many real jobs. Over a period of years, Bernanke justified taking such risks in part because Congress wasn’t doing anything to help. On November 3, 2010, after the second day of their meeting, FOMC members approved Bernanke’s plan for $600 billion in quantitative easing. The Fed made itself central to America’s economic growth." - https://time.com/6112931/federal-reserve-wealth-inequality-recession/

To Trumps Tax Cuts

To stock buybacks that enrich only management and investors at the expense of workers and consumers (which were made legal during the Reagan Administration.)

to big corporations getting into housing and apartment speculation and crowding regular people out of affordable housing and building wealth. It is cannibalism.

100% of the Republicans and half of the Democrats are on board with the upward redistribution of wealth.

Feels like there is less and less to go around. It's not capitalism if the money isn't in the system being used. The rich are hoarding too much.

Major league baseball is an example of pure greed in my opinion. A bunch of guys playing games and commanding ridiculous salaries. My husband loves baseball, me not so much. They have to pay the players a ton of money so they can have a winning team. I say let them walk. It's not a family affair anymore. A bottle of water is ridiculous. The players get millions, but that guy who brings you the soda gets the crumbs. Watched a pitcher supposedly show off his kitchen skills. He didn't know shit. His poor wife. Unbelievable the salary they require. They have no other skills in life. They play games and get rich.

is concentration of power.

Wealth is power. Always has been. Always will be.

My response to "supply-side" economics is this: put money in the hands of a rich man, and he's going to put it in his pocket, because he can. Put money in the hands of a common man, and he's going to spend it, because he has to. And when he does spend it, where's it going to go? Into the hands of the rich man! That's how he got rich in the first place. Government doesn't need to help out the folks at the top. They're doing okay.

More tax cuts for the Rich.

Diminished revenue for social programs which lead to greater deficits and eventual elimination of those programs.

Rec