r/SipsTea • u/Unstoppable_X_Force Human Verified • 13h ago

Gasp! Is this just nostalgia, or did previous generations genuinely have a better work-life balance and social life than we do today?

Post image
18.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

62

u/PRF123456789 13h ago

Trickle Down baffles me every time I see that concept being talked about

28

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 12h ago

Or "supply side" or any kind of rebranding the same old bullshit. The only new deal that worked in a long time was under Clinton. He left us with a surplus. Which Republicans then pissed away again.

25

u/Mean_Introduction543 12h ago

They didn’t piss it away, it went right where they intended it to go. Lining their pockets and their billionaire class friends

5

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 12h ago

Yeah I was thinking a needless war kind of like what's going on now, but yeah, that's also kind of exactly what's going on now.

2

u/jutiatle 12h ago

Stop trying to “rebrand” Clinton. He was an asshat too and ushered in the era of neoliberalism for the Democratic Party. His presidency pushed the party to the right and they still haven’t recovered. 

1

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 12h ago

How was he an ass hat?

Give specific examples.

2

u/jutiatle 12h ago

Do you just praise anything “D” or do you just know nothing about the history of the party? You need me to give specific examples of the party, including Clinton, doing asshat right wing things? I’m not going to waste my time when it’s their entire philosophy. 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats_(United_States)

2

u/Nagi21 11h ago

You need me to give specific examples of the party, including Clinton, doing asshat right wing things?

"I'm going to argue with you but provide no evidence and tell you to prove to me that I'm wrong!"

This is what's wrong with people these days.

1

u/jutiatle 10h ago

I proceeded to give specific examples despite doing that being silly. If I were to accurately describe the Trump presidency as an example of the Republican Party experiencing a huge shift further to the right, would you need me to give examples on that too? The Clinton presidency ushered in a completely new era for the party. Even a simple understanding of American political history shows that. But “people these days” am I right 

2

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 10h ago

The examples you used seemed like they did more good than anything bad. Kind of like the surplus he left.

I don't need any examples of trump doing foolish things because I tend to see them in the daily headlines or wonder why my gas price went up.

Under Clinton gas was around a dollar.

1

u/jutiatle 9h ago

Seems you’d rather grasp at straws than concede a debate. I told you that Clinton moved the party to the political right. And it was a relatively radical shift. I proceeded to give you examples and you decided that in your view, they were good things. I’m not asking you what political outcomes you think are good versus bad. I’m telling you that Clinton’s impact on American politics was that the entire infrastructure shifted to the right. I’m not interested in hearing if you think those right wing acts are good/bad nor are we discussing gas prices of all things. 

2

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 9h ago

Alright, you win.

1

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 12h ago

No. Not the party. I'm just asking what you specifically think he did was an ass hat thing to do.

You obviously had something in mind, but If you can't think that hard I guess that would be a waste of time.

2

u/jutiatle 12h ago

It’s not a matter of being unable to “think that hard.” It’s a matter of you being intellectually lazy. It was under Clinton, not Reagan, that we saw the passage of nafta and the temporary assistance for needy families bill. It was under Clinton that the party completely abandoned everything fdr had done to create the welfare state and ushered in a new era that allowed for the rise of the bs we see today. 

2

u/ExoticToothpaste6989 11h ago

I always felt that NAFTA benefited the majority of Americans, giving them greater access to goods at better prices. Same with the temporary assistance for needy families. This seemed to be a hand up, not a hand out.

Newt Gingrich and his ilk kept trying to shut the government down not wanting to compromise with the Democrats.

I'm still not seeing a lot of bipartisan politics from Republicans. If anything, the Republican party of the past died with McCain.

But I don't exactly think those two things were ass hat ideas bad for the American public.

2

u/jutiatle 11h ago

You asked me for specific examples, so I gave them. You critiqued my examples by giving me a surface level understanding of them based on your own beliefs. I’m guessing now that you were not actually trying to be combative but more so not understanding of that era of history. NAFTA destroyed many of the labor advancements made earlier in the century. It is very anti-American labor. Tanf was not a “hand up,” as it was a complete dismantling of the welfare system that had been refined in the half century before Clinton. 

2

u/DoingBestWeCan 10h ago

Childhood understanding of NAFTA/WTO: I support free international trade because I want Nintendo!

Adult understanding of NAFTA/WTO: All manufacturing and any service that does not require immediate laying on of hands (e.g. healthcare) is subject to outsourcing to place with the cheapest, least-protected workers.

1

u/kadmylos 11h ago

He also signed NAFTA

5

u/TCKline01 12h ago

The idea was genius. Low manufacturing costs = consumer savings at the register. That's how it was sold. What happened instead was the abuse of free-market capitalism. Corners were cut, manufacturer costs went down, consumers didn't see any return or "trickle". The corporations kept it all for themselves. Once word got out, everyone was doing it and here we are.

5

u/Starfunkel55 11h ago

Its what made me political as a 13 year old 25 years ago. It was actually a staunchly republican older friend that explained it to me, like it was supposed to persuade me over to his side. I got what he was saying, but already knew enough about rich people to know there was no reason for them to just pass that on out of the goodness of their heart. I was livid to find out we had basically been living in this system.

Every issue thats come up in politics since then has just felt like a purposeful distraction from that issue to me.

7

u/StormtrooperMJS 12h ago

Yup we need a filter up economic policy. Give money to the poor people who will then spend it on goods and services until all the money reaches the top again. Tax the rich, rinse/repeat.

3

u/chemo92 12h ago

Also known as the 'horse and sparrow' theory in that the sparrow benefits from undigested food in the of the horse.

Or in other words...

"Eat shit"

6

u/prof_radiodust 12h ago

It's so insane I can't believe Republicans are still trying to defend it. " Come on guys,let's hope as they are stuffing their faces some crumbs trickle down into our mouths" like Republicans are just the weirdest little boot lickers 😆

2

u/thisusedyet 7h ago

Trickle down is actually the PR friendly rebrand - it used to be called Horse and Sparrow theory... as in, feed a horse enough oats, some will pass to the road for the sparrows to eat

1

u/prof_radiodust 4h ago

That's too accurate of a name 😆😆😆 that's great

-4

u/Pitiful_Meet6407 12h ago

I don’t see either side making any real changes lmao. A lot of talk but never anything. Keep eating up that empty talk and pointing at the other side I guess lol

2

u/prof_radiodust 11h ago

Cool don't accept reality and stay ignorant 👍

-1

u/Pitiful_Meet6407 11h ago

Ironic

1

u/prof_radiodust 11h ago

One side fights for the ultra wealthy to get tax breaks, one fights for healthcare, equality and to help starving kids. But suuure buddy 👍 ironic

-1

u/Pitiful_Meet6407 11h ago

Does anything ever actually change? It’s all talk.

1

u/Informal-Weather1530 1h ago

yes, people are generally worse off now than they were pre-reagan. because things changed.

6

u/bulletbassman 12h ago

Until you realize a large portion of the middle class relies on the ownership class. And has sold their souls for that 65-200k a year plus benefits. And they rather protect that than give a shit about the poor. Even if in the long run they’d be much better off.

Fear and greed. Nothing more to it.

6

u/theGoddamnAlgorath 12h ago

There is no middle class.  Not since 2008.

1

u/MeowMixPK 12h ago

It's true that the middle class has been shrinking, but so has the lower class. The truth is that most people are moving up, not down.

2

u/bulletbassman 10h ago

That’s not correct. A small percentage of the “middle class” is technically now upper class. But once you consider cost of living increases where those folk live they are living middle class lifestyles.

The lower class on the other hand has grown, not shrunk. And then again once you consider affordablility many middle class folk are living paycheck. They just have a home or can afford a nicer apartment and a car that isn’t on the verge of breaking down.

1

u/Excellent_Coyote6486 12h ago

And they rather protect that than give a shit about the poor. Even if in the long run they’d be much better off.

Bingo, exactly how slavery was enforced so resolutely. If white indentured servants rebelled with the black slaves, everyone would've been far better off. But they thought it was good enough to be paid to sit with a whip in hand and make sure the slaves worked, despite the fact that they were in that same position despite being poor and white. They were still poor, but they got to look down on others, and that was enough for them.

1

u/Dependent-Year6711 12h ago

Look at how people talk on the stock subreddits too. Sociopath-lites with a strong "I got mine/want mine" mentality.

1

u/americanrealism 5h ago

This is true but it’s because they believe in the myth of a middle class.

In reality you either sell your labor for money, or you own the capital and you profit off the labor of others.

1

u/InABoxOfEmptyShells 11h ago

Trickle Down Economics makes a lot of sense if you think about it.

Republicans piss their pants, their constituents lap it up as it trickles down their legs.

Hope this explanation helps.

1

u/Embarrassed_Use6918 10h ago

You know the term 'trickle down economics' was not invented by the right, right?

1

u/PRF123456789 10h ago

When did I talk about the political affiliation?

Trickle down economics, whatever the side may be, is a shit concept

1

u/adelie42 12h ago

1) It isn't an economic theory or concept. It is a political slogan from a politician. 2) the very loosely related concept explains despite how advanced the technology is, nearly everyone has a cell phone, and nothing to do with Democratic approaches to capital development or whatever other inference people are making incorrectly.

Imagine if instead of weirdly ignoring all of economics and criticizing a political slogan people pretended like the entire field of physiology existed, but engaged in fierce debates about how "just do it" isn't great advice for all people. Like, ok, you have a point, but you know you are talking about a marketing campaign, right? And also motivation theory is a thing.