a slight aside. if we assume good faith on the part of conservatives about their economic theory, much of the opposition to redistribution of wealth sits on an assumption that more cash in the hands of the wealthy will result in economic expansion to the benefit of all. of course, this is conceptually absurd because it brackets the actual motor of the american economy--consumer demand---and so ignores the consequences of transferring immense amounts of money away from most people. it is also demonstrably, empirically false. some data is here:
Why the Wealthiest Americans Are the Real 'Job-Killers' | Economy | AlterNet
this data is more interesting than the article itself, which has a single point to make and does it several times. the main point is: a significant--if not the primary--explanation for the jobless recovery--if you want to call it a recovery---is the effects of neo-liberal economic policy implemented, which has resulted in a massive transfer of wealth into the hands of the top ten percent in terms of wealth---who have, in the main, not acted as conservative fantasy would have you believe, but who have held onto it. the results are not rocket science to figure out.
so even the utilitarian justification for the right's bogus economic thinking is out the window.
if that goes, then there's really nothing left---it takes out such ethical justification as conservative tend to adduce. that leaves them having to address the empirical consequences of their policies---which, as ace shows, they cannot and will not do.
it seems to me past time to go after a significant aspect of the right's power base--dismantle the national security state, repeal those stuid tax cuts, clamp down on the ability of transnational corporations to avoid paying taxes. there also has to be some kind of social-democratic style orientation toward making capital available for new businesses to start up--maybe something on the order of the jaanese model of funneling resources into areas of economic activity that are understood as beneficial socially and/or politically. there should also be some kind of instrument--perhaps a tax on maritime fuel---that would force a reconsideration of the kind of economies of scale that enable outcomes like the walmart model. a re-regionalization of production, a significant incentive to reduce distances between production and end users. a basic rethinking of the capitalist division of intellectual labor would be good as well--one can think big. for anything like this to work over the longer term, something has to be done about the shabby state of the american education system. decoupling school funding from local property taxes would be a start---make funding flat across states---eliminate the effects of class on the future horizons of kids. and increase the quality of teachers. pay them better. all this is entirely possible simply from the dismantling of the machinery of empire. and it does not in any way follow anything like a ron paul back-to-the-20s isolationism. the united state is imbricated with the wider world. but that imbrication does not require an american empire to happen. it's not that hard to think of concrete steps that could happen.
what's clear, however, is that the days of neo-liberalism have to end. and that will likely require breaking the back of the right as it is currently configured. the prospect is pleasing. they have nothing to say, nothing to offer and have backed themselves into a sociopathic politics based entirely on short-term expedients with the idea of getting back into power.