Framing Our Debate On Fiscal Policy - Part 1 - GDP growth
by Michael Heath
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/assets_c/2010/12/Real%20GDP%20Growth%20Rate%201951%20-%202010%20in%202005%20$-thumb-600x349-59351-thumb-500x290-59352.jpg
# 1) We should advocate for policies that optimize long-term economic growth rates.
# 2) Because of technological innovations we can no longer depend on adequate growth alone to provide full employment, therefore policies should also consider how to achieve growth with full employment.
# 3) Growth policies should also optimize median discretionary
income. We know that enormous disparities in income does not correlate to a healthy society, especially if one wants to optimize our meritocracy and optimize opportunities for upward mobility - where the U.S. used to lead and we've now become mediocre relative to other developed economies.
# 4) There is enough wealth in the world and in this country to afford a social safety net that insures people have adequate food, shelter, and the only arguably debate point - access to healthcare.
Some of you might find this list is too short, e.g., guaranteed optimal public education; however I would argue that in order to achieve any combination of the above factors, we would require a policy that guarantees its entire populace has access to education, even number 4. # 4 as well because we couldn't afford such social nets without a supportive workforce who can afford to fund such for those less fortunate. Also note that these premises are consistent with right-wing and left-wing policies in the past with the arguable goal of access to healthcare (which I think is somewhat irrelevant to the points made in this series). Yes there are outlier examples of conservative rhetoric attacking this paradigm on matters other than healthcare, but even in the 2000s we didn't see any success in purposefully dismantling this paradigm nor any serious attempts either.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/12/framing_our_debate_on_fiscal_p.php