It bears repeating that Romney's view of how things work is a hard pill for the rest of us to swallow:
Romney Economics refuses to take responsibility for the future of the next generation. In fact the whole body of radical right wing economic philosophy that Romney has embraced is an absolute abrogation of the concept that we have a responsibility to each other. The core element of that philosophy is the notion that millionaires and billionaires have only one moral obligation -- to look out for themselves. They rationalize this unbridled selfishness with elaborate theories about how their bounty will ultimately trickle down to everyone else -- how they have to make more money because they are -- after all -- the 'job creators.' In fact, of course, the real job creators are ordinary middle class consumers, whose demand causes businesses of all sorts to hire people to produce products and services. Companies don't create jobs because they have more money in their bank accounts or out of the goodness of their hearts. They create jobs because someone has the money in their pockets to buy the things that they sell.
But 'trickle down' economics is really nothing more than an elaborate justification for millionaire selfishness -- for the refusal of the wealthiest Americans to take responsibility for the welfare of the entire community and for the next generation. The advocates of Romney Economics claim to be hugely concerned that we do not leave our children a massive federal debt. But their concern does not carry far enough to allow them to agree to a meager increase in their own tax rates to levels that persisted during the 1990's when our economy added 23 million new jobs and created quite a number of new millionaires. They're responsibility to the next generation does not go far enough to prevent them from despoiling the planet in order to pad their Swiss Bank accounts. It does not prevent them from denying the scientific fact of global climate change in order to prevent oil company profits from declining.
How many economists does it take to proclaim that "trickle down" economics doesn't exist before people listen?
I hope that Obama's campaign continues to make the point that how Romney behaved at Bain and with his own personal financial decisions (vast amounts, not just one, but many, of offshore accounts) reflects on how he will make decisions as President.
Here is a link that might be useful: source