Is Obamanomics Conservative or Revolutionary?

There are two ways to see Obamanomics.

So there we have it: Obamanomics as pragmatic, incremental, centrist, even conservative.

But there's another way to view Obamanomics -- as an economic philosophy exactly the opposite of the one that's dominated America for more than a quarter century.

The basic idea of Reaganomics was that the economy grows from the top down. Lower taxes on the wealthy make them work harder and invest more, and the benefits trickle down to everyone else. Rarely in economic history has a theory been more tested in the real world and proven so wrong. In point of fact, nothing trickled down. After the Reagan tax cuts, increases in the median wage slowed, adjusted for inflation. After George W. Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, the median wage actually dropped. Meanwhile, most of the income went to the top. In 1980, just before the Reagan revolution, the richest 1 percent took home 9 percent of total national income. But by 2007, the richest 1 percent was taking home 22 percent.

If you look only at the small print, Obamanomics looks conservative. If you look at the big picture, it's revolutionary.

马克思主义者在笑，而马克思在哭。老实说，如果没有政府强制财富再分配，资本主义早灭亡了。