> Also: I'm not ... to a strictly economic one. Agreed. And offering dystopian prospects for the future is an excellent way to reduce fertility in rich countr

> Also: I'm not ... to a strictly economic one. Agreed. And offering dystopian prospects for the future is an excellent way to reduce fertility in rich countries. OTOH, if they were actually competent and honest in their economic approach - then they would have mentioned the too-many decades during which the costs of education, housing, and medical care have all been growing much faster than incomes, for the 99%. And maybe even suggested that that's a real problem. Conclusion: This is pretty much a program to be enacted by the 0.01%, for the benefit of the 1%. The 99% are left somewhere between "lip service", and "claims of their existence are exaggerated". And conveniently, "yet more of the pie for us" sounds far less dystopian to those at the top...