[SFmom]

This is what the cartoonist says about the supply side analogy: For millions of Americans, if they can't find a higher paying job, that means taking a second, or third, or fourth job. But the principle's the same: if supply-siders are going to compare the national economy to an individual household, they can't escape the fact that households usually can't *cut* themselves out of poverty; and they definitely can't cut themselves into prosperity."

The under-informed actually believe this stuff. We need some supply-side cartoonists!

[lurk]

Using the household analogy, if you’re spending more than you take in, or if your debt is greater than your income and assets together, you’ve got to cut expenses any way you can.

More money in only leads to more money out. That is why people making half a million are often still barely making it, while many people making 1/10th of that are making ends meet.

[PieterCasparzen]

“It may seem hard to save money, but once you learn about Oseola McCarty, you’ll see how few excuses you have.

You see, McCarty managed to accumulate way more than the average American — $280,000 — while living in conditions much tougher than most of us. Born in 1908, she worked doing laundry for 75 years, having had to leave school in the sixth grade. She never earned more than $9,000 per year.”

http://www.usm.edu/news/archives/older/oola1.htm

[Monitor]

He depicts a right-winger debating the "good guy" a.k.a. the cartoonist himself about cutting government spending. Right-winger sez when a family spends too much they cut back to balance the budget. The "good guy" sez "Or they can get a job which makes more money".

And in the next panel, the right-winger should reply, "Great idea!" and pull out his concealed firearm, point it at the "good guy", and demand the "good guy" hand over his hard-earned money.