I didn't watch the State of the Union address last night. It was past my bedtime, plus I already knew whatever the President said would be dead-on-arrival and could already cite the reasons the Republicans would use to explain why everything was dead-on-arrival.
But, apparently, the President coined a new phrase -- middle class economics. I've been scouring the internet looking for a definition without success. Given the source, the term must be rooted in Keynesian economics. But, it reminds of of a famous urban myth that the CEO of GM once said "whatever is good for GM is good for the country." I think "middle class economics" means that anything that is good for the middle class is good for the country. This neatly justifies a higher tax on the upper class to pay for middle class entitlements.
And, by the way, the CEO of GM never made such a foolish statement. In 1953, Charles "Engine Charlie" Wilson had that job until nominated by President Eisenhower for Secretary of Defense. He was asked if he could act as Secretary of Defense in a way detrimental to GM and replied that such a conflict was highly improbable "because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa."
But, apparently, the President coined a new phrase -- middle class economics. I've been scouring the internet looking for a definition without success. Given the source, the term must be rooted in Keynesian economics. But, it reminds of of a famous urban myth that the CEO of GM once said "whatever is good for GM is good for the country." I think "middle class economics" means that anything that is good for the middle class is good for the country. This neatly justifies a higher tax on the upper class to pay for middle class entitlements.
And, by the way, the CEO of GM never made such a foolish statement. In 1953, Charles "Engine Charlie" Wilson had that job until nominated by President Eisenhower for Secretary of Defense. He was asked if he could act as Secretary of Defense in a way detrimental to GM and replied that such a conflict was highly improbable "because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa."
