DENVER - Millions tuned in to last night's season premier of 'The Walking Dead' on AMC. While zombies on our TV screens may be good for some white-knuckled entertainment, economists warn zombies in our economy are not.

"Zombie economics" is a term that describes economic principles that have been proven in practice not to hold true, explains Chris Stiffler with the Colorado Fiscal Institute.

"We say in scary movies a zombie is a corpse that comes back to life," says Stiffler. "But even scarier in the real world is this idea of 'zombie economics,' which we call dangerous doctrines that are repeatedly slain by evidence, but are still walking among us."

Stiffler says supply-side or trickle-down economics is an example of zombie economics that's the "hardest to kill." He says the theory that cutting taxes for the rich ends up helping everyone has been proven false several times in practice since it entered public dialogue in the 1980s.

Since then, he says the richest 20 percent of Americans have seen a 71-percent increase in their earnings, while the bottom 20-percent have seen a seven-percent increase.

Stiffler cites neighboring Kansas as another example of supply-side economics not working. The state signed into law huge tax cuts that experts say have resulted in large revenue loss and cuts to public services. He says that's the "trick" of "trickle-down" economics.

"No matter how low your taxes are on your business, if don't have the consumers to buy your products you're not going to have a successful business," he says. "So, at a common sense level you wouldn't think that would be true, but it's just plausible enough that people use it as a justification for tax credits and people accept it. It's kind of like - just like a scary movie - the more you want to believe it, the more real it seems."

Economist John Quiggin originally coined the term "zombie economics" in his 2010 book by that name.

In related zombie news, this Saturday, Oct. 18, Denver will host what it hopes to be the largest Zombie Crawl in history at Skyline Park. The event benefits the Bonfils Blood Center.


get more stories like this via email

The nation's billionaires have doubled their wealth over the past seven years, while working people in West Virginia and elsewhere continue to face economic struggles.

The collective fortune of America's more than eight hundred billionaires hit a record $5.8 trillion in April, according to a new report by Americans for Tax Fairness.

Gary Zuckett, executive director of the Citizen Action Education Fund, said the Mountain State is just beginning to see the ramifications of a deep income tax cut that was passed last year by state lawmakers.

He said the lack of funding has made it difficult to address steadily worsening problems.

"Like the child-care crisis in West Virginia, the corrections crisis - our prisons have been in the state of emergency for the last three or four years," said Zuckett. "There's a lot of things that we need to be using our tax money for, besides giving it to the rich in income tax cuts."

America's billionaires now own more than 50% more wealth than does the entire bottom half of the nation's households.

Under the current tax code, however, the staggering wealth gains made by the richest are unlikely to ever be taxed.

Trump-era tax benefits for the wealthy enacted in 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025.

Zuckett explains that the laws cut the top income-tax rate from more than 39% to 37%, and cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%.

"The mom and pop grocery stores and the people working in Walmart, everyday working people," said Zuckett, "pay taxes on every dollar that they earn, but the system is rigged to benefit people at the top."

According to the report, if the wealthiest Americans were taxed at the rate of average Americans, the nation would have new potential tax revenue of roughly $120 billion each year, which could help pay for more affordable and accessible health care.





get more stories like this via email

Michigan legislators are tackling predatory lending practices, aiming to set standards for payday loans and maximum interest rates.

In Kent County alone, with a payday loan volume of $60 million, the House Insurance and Financial Services Committee discussed Senate Bill 632, sponsored by Sen. Sarah Anthony, D-Lansing, which seeks to cap annual interest rates at 36% compared to current rates reaching nearly 400%.

The bill has passed the Senate and is part of a legislative effort including House Bill 5290, sponsored by Rep. Abraham Aiyash, D-Hamtramck.

Dallas Lenear, founder and executive director of Project GREEN, a grassroots economic empowerment network, highlighted concerns about the exploitative nature of these loans.

"Payday loans inevitably are designed in a fashion that is unaffordable for the majority of people who use those loans," Lenear contended.

Lenear pointed out many other states have already capped their interest rate or totally outlawed payday loans because of the financial damage they can cause their citizens and argued it is time for Michigan to do better.

Lenear noted while the payday loan industry believes it offers hope to borrowers in times of need, a study by project GREEN found 78% of respondents said payday loans either prolonged or worsened their financial situation.

"If they've had any experience with it, they'll start to shake their head and they'll say those things are terrible and I was caught in the trap and I would never use those things again. I'd use it out of desperation," Lenear reported.

Advocacy groups such as the Michigan League for Public Policy and the Michigan Catholic Conference testified in support of the bills, to end the predatory practices.

A case before the U.S. Supreme Court could have implications for the country's growing labor movement. Justices will hear oral arguments in Starbucks versus McKinney today to determine if the bar should be raised for the National Labor Relations Board when it seeks to impose court-ordered injunctions on companies.

David Groves, communications director with the Washington State Labor Council, said the Supreme Court could further undermine the power of the NLRB, the independent federal agency that protects employees' rights.

"We already have weak labor laws in this country that have such minor penalties for breaking union organizing laws that companies routinely do it, and this is another opportunity for them to weaken labor laws even further," he argued.

The case involves Starbucks' firing of seven employees in Memphis during their union campaign in 2021. The coffee company says it rehired the workers and denies wrongdoing. If the justices rule in favor of Starbucks, it could make it harder for the NLRB to seek court orders.

Groves said the law states that workers have a right to organize unions in their workplace without coercion or retaliation from their employers.

"That's all fine and good but if the penalty's not significant enough, then they'll just go ahead and break that law and consider it the cost of doing business if they have to pay a fine two years down the road," he explained.

Groves said his and other labor organizations support the passage of the Protecting the Right to Organize or PRO Act in Congress, which would strengthen labor laws, including providing greater authority to the NLRB.


get more stories like this via email