>I'm also taking the view that raising the prosperity for the lowest individuals will in turn increase the prosperity for everyone else.
This is an aside, and I don't particularly want to evaluate it as good or bad, but this statement is striking compared to the neoliberal idea of 'a rising tide lifts all boats' - i.e. increasing general prosperty raises prosperity for the lowest individuals.
Thanks for responding. I never really thought about how that might be a controversial opinion but it does ring true the more I think about it. My self-described "libertarian" friends don't believe in the same social policies I do and don't believe in the same correlations between social policies and economic success.
I'm sure you already knew this but I figured I'd share it anyways: After thinking about it last night I decided I believed in a "trickle up effect" and then went to google it, thinking it a nice take on the "trickle down effect," only to find that "trickle up effect" was the original and "trickle down" was apparently the clever take down... Sigh. Guess I should have paid more attention in Economics.
Anyways, like most economic theories I'm sure there are a myriad of reasons why it might not work or be the most effective (which you graciously decided to not go into.)
This is an aside, and I don't particularly want to evaluate it as good or bad, but this statement is striking compared to the neoliberal idea of 'a rising tide lifts all boats' - i.e. increasing general prosperty raises prosperity for the lowest individuals.