I have written before about the myth of Republican fiscal responsibility. Simply put, the government is run better under Democratic control or split control (with both parties having a say) than when Republicans are dominant. This is most easily seen with this graph:

On state levels also, you have a better shot of getting a balanced budget under moderate Democrats than under Republicans.

But what about the accusation, made by Al Gore regarding Bush's then proposed tax cuts for the very wealthy? Was Al Gore right that Bush's economic policies will only help the very rich? Jerome a Paris over at Daily Kos presents a graph that proves Al Gore pretty much right. During the period of maximal Republican dominance, when trickle down economics were once again applied to the US economy, growth helped only the richest Americans.

Here's the graph:

Median wages (the wage that half of Americans earn more than, and half earn less than...in other words the MIDDLE wage, not the average wage) stagnated despite economic growth. Most Americans earned the same wage that they did before the period of growth.

AL Gore predicted that only the top 10% would benefit from Bush's policies. Here is a quote from the NY Times that is in the same Daily Kos diary:

While total reported income in the United States increased almost 9 percent in 2005, the most recent year for which such data is available, average incomes for those in the bottom 90 percent dipped slightly compared with the year before, dropping $172, or 0.6 percent.

The gains went largely to the top 1 percent, whose incomes rose to an average of more than $1.1 million each, an increase of more than $139,000, or about 14 percent.

The new data also shows that the top 300,000 Americans collectively enjoyed almost as much income as the bottom 150 million Americans. Per person, the top group received 440 times as much as the average person in the bottom half earned, nearly doubling the gap from 1980.

Okay, so Al Gore was wrong. It didn't benefit primarily the top 10%...it benefitted primarily the top 1%.

Trickle down didn't work in the 1920's when it set up the conditions for the Great Depression. Trickle down didn't work under Reagan, whose policies helped the top third and hurt the bottom third and set up conditions for the recession under the elected Bush. And it sure isn't working now.

The first thing Democrats did once they took control of Congress is enact a minimum wage increase, in fulfillment of one of their top campaign promises. We don't know what effect this will have economically just yet. But it shows priorities. Bush and the Republicans enacted tax cuts for the very rich and the benefits only helped the top 1%. Democrats, as their very first action upon taking control of Congress, enact a minimum wage increase. It really does say something about priorities and it shows why I am proud to be a Democrat despite their warts and weaknesses. I like the overall priorities of the Democratic Party.