Rightwing economics is the economics of the rich. It’s only good for the rich, and it’s bad for everyone else. It is also good for the upper middle class. If you are in the top 20% of the income bracket, rightwing economics is good for you, but you are still getting screwed a bit, as the top 1% are getting way more than you are. Anyway, it’s a good deal. If you have an income above $75,000/yr, by all means, vote conservative. Help yourself to as much as you like.
But for most all working people and even for most middle class people, conservative economics is a raw deal. They are better off voting for a more Left economics – even Eisenhower’s would be fine.
Under Bush and Reagan, the entire top 20% of Americans gained money. The entire bottom 80% of Americans lost money over 12 years. Conservative economics involves a mass income shift from the lower to the upper.
In Chile, the bottom 2/3 of the population lost a dramatic amount of money under Pinochet, but the top 1/3 did very well. What Pinochet did was massively transfer wealth from the bottom 2/3 upwards to the top 1/3. In the US, Chilean economics would involve a massive transfer of wealth from people making under $62,000/yr to people making over $62,000/yr. If you are a Chilean, and you are not in the top 1/3 of the income bracket, you are nuts for supporting Pinochetism. Chilean economics would be a bad deal for most Americans too.
Everywhere on Earth that neoliberalism has been tried, especially in the 3rd world, only the top 20% of the population has benefited. This was the case in Latin America after 20 years of neoliberalism. Only the top 20% had benefited, and the bottom 80% had lost a lot of money. This is why Latin America turned Left recently. Rightwing economics had caused nothing but decades of failure.