U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 04:44 PM
 
3,218 posts, read 1,359,984 times
Reputation: 2379

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
So what system doesn't have corruption?
Whatever you call what Jesus talked about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 04:46 PM
 
4,503 posts, read 2,371,172 times
Reputation: 3827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobster View Post
Whatever you call what Jesus talked about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:54 PM
 
2,423 posts, read 584,787 times
Reputation: 2009
I guess you haven't noticed how well the economy is doing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:01 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
12,302 posts, read 7,859,403 times
Reputation: 18041
The idea that trickle down economics doesn't work is demonstrable false.
Of course it works! Why do you think wages are higher in wealthy areas?
Why do you think human leeches, who have no intention of working, prefer to hang out where people have money?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:02 PM
 
7,572 posts, read 8,432,732 times
Reputation: 5720
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser View Post
Anybody who lived through the 80s and didn't know trickle down doesn't work, is totally clueless.
Best guess is your time horizons are off. The really bad portion of the '80 was pre-supply side anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:04 PM
 
7,572 posts, read 8,432,732 times
Reputation: 5720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Well, you can make Demand Side fail by using reductio ad absurdum. Well done.


Seriously, one thing the wealthy and corporations haven't caught on to (or they don't want to): since demand is currently constrained, if Demand Side policies are pursued, then economic activity will increase as the lower and middle classes have more discretionary income. This will increase revenue, sales and profits at businesses. The wealthy will make more money and profits with demand side. It's a feedback loop.
What exactly do you mean by demand side policies?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:07 PM
 
4,503 posts, read 2,371,172 times
Reputation: 3827
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
What exactly do you mean by demand side policies?
+1

I'm still waiting for a real life example of "if Demand Side policies are pursued, then economic activity will increase as the lower and middle classes have more discretionary income. This will increase revenue, sales and profits at businesses. The wealthy will make more money and profits with demand side. It's a feedback loop."

It sounds fascinating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:13 PM
 
2,153 posts, read 505,856 times
Reputation: 2398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
"Most firms haven't accelerated hiring or investments as a result of the tax-cut law enacted by Republicans last year, according to a new survey by the National Association for Business Economics (NABE). Eighty-one percent of NABE members surveyed said the 2017 law, known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, hasn't led their firms to make changes to hiring or investment plans"

So we handed out tax cuts -- funded by increased public deficit financing -- and 81% aren't hiring employees nor investing in capital improvements. That means we are going to spend $1 Trillion in deficit dollars and get very little economic stimulus or activity in return?

All signs in the economy point towards restrained demand, not a shortage of capital (supply). Doing supply side policy when there's already an abundance of supply is, as Keynes put it, "pushing on a string."

Trickle down, once again, has proven to not trickle. Capital injected at the top is sticky, it stays up there.
Tax cuts will not lead employers to hire unnecessary employees. However, many people would love to spend a sudden windfall that's burning a hole in their pockets.

In a roaring economy, and after a huge tax cut, AT&T disbursed a lump sum of $1000 to all its employees. Mind you, this does not derail their "2020 Vision" of reducing the global workforce by 1/3 by the year 2020. Nor will it stop the Voluntary Separation Package, nor will it stop any layoffs thereafter if the VSP falls short on takers, or business needs change.

So, with potentially billions saved in the coming years, other than a one-time celebratory incentive, it's business as usual until there is some enormous project (like AT&T Fiber) being built out that they need to hire for. Since 2015 employees in Construction & Engineering (Linemen) have been hired as temporary - on AT&T payroll, with AT&T benefits, but cannot participate in the job bank if laid off, until they're converted or accept a permanent position.

Most deployments were initiated reactively (cities chosen) to complete alongside Google Fiber, but then fiber was lit faster and proactively built farther out (larger footprint) than Google's pace and plans. Unless they smell competition in a "one cable, one telephone" city, or stand to make a LOT of money offering a high value-add in a monopolized area, they're not buying into "residential services". Enterprise contracts have more wiggle room, as entire "Solutions" are sold and can be chock full of value for both parties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:18 PM
 
11,052 posts, read 20,620,677 times
Reputation: 10417
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
I see your heart but I don't see the logic.

Why is income inequality inherently a bad thing? This is how most progressive tax arguments are framed.

Warren Buffet literally has a net worth that is 1,350 times larger than mine, yet I daily drive a BMW M4, and own a winter and summer home.

Am I really being hurt by income inequality? I just don't get the economic or logical argument behind it.
You? No not really. Someone who has a networth of $6m is not really harmed by income inequality.

It's the bottom roughly 25%-80% that are. Basically the folks that have to worrry about paying for such basic needs they don't have much left over to reinvest. Or help their kids and provide them every opportunity available.

I'm not arguing for a huge increase in the progressive ranks but certainly an increase to cut down the deficit and slow inflation which impacts the lower classes much more substantially is in order.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:21 PM
 
4,503 posts, read 2,371,172 times
Reputation: 3827
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
You? No not really. Someone who has a networth of $6m is not really harmed by income inequality.

It's the bottom roughly 25%-80% that are. Basically the folks that have to worrry about paying for such basic needs they don't have much left over to reinvest. Or help their kids and provide them every opportunity available.

I'm not arguing for a huge increase in the progressive ranks but certainly an increase to cut down the deficit and slow inflation which impacts the lower classes much more substantially is in order.
Why not a reduction in spending?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top