Paul Krugman makes a good point.
I just wish that the left would make more mainstream the comparisons so that more people can see that when the rich paid more, everybody prospered. When their incomes weren't so obscene (which takes away from the rest of us), didn't have houses that spanned acres not including the drives and lawn, skippered their own boats without a myriad of crew to service their guests, America was much more... equal. While not more tolerant or moral we were all Americans. Not like today when there are the elites and peasants, haves and have nothings and the inbetween is getting slimmer and slimmer with the ranks of the have nothings growing exponentially faster than the haves (or have-mores as GWB put it).
The 1950's were not prosperous for ceo's by todays standard, but America prospered. Income was not hoarded at the top and unions negotiated as equals, not competitors. Unions made life... not exorbinant, but comfortable. The middle class was indeed middle and was HUGE... not like today where it is shrinking toward the bottom... quickly
Those on the left need to stress the falsehood of the rich paying more makes jobs. Cite the 1950's where we were at full employment and there was money for roads and bridges and dams and schools and ships and oil rigs... big things that are not even talked about anymore - where you could be a waitress or an auto mechanic and actually support a family - not like today where it takes BOTH.