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.
I'd like to review your evidence. Under the trickle down theory, if one lowers taxes on the wealthy, the poor would be better off.
What the we found was that when we lowered taxes on the wealthy, their income soared and left everyone else stagnant.
Trickle-down theory predicts a positive correlation between inequality and economic growth, the idea being that income disparities strengthen motivation to get ahead. Yet when researchers track the data within individual countries over time, they find a negative correlation. In the decades immediately after World War II, for example, income inequality was low by historical standards, yet growth rates in most industrial countries were extremely high. In contrast, growth rates have been only about half as large in the years since 1973, a period in which inequality has been steadily rising.
There is no empirical evidence that trickle down is anything but a historically discredited theory.
In order for trickle down to work, the wealthy would have to invest the the tax breaks they receive. In a way, the capitalist system we live in today is trickle down. The wealthy invest their money into businesses and in return create jobs for us to earn money.
In order for trickle down to work, the wealthy would have to invest the the tax breaks they receive. In a way, the capitalist system we live in today is trickle down. The wealthy invest their money into businesses and in return create jobs for us to earn money.
What you write sounds so logical and reasonable, but here is the fundamental question:
How did the United States of America, in the decades and centuries after 1776, become the most productive, wealthy, advanced nation on the face of the Earth? The lot of the average person improved unimaginably over any fifty year period through that timespan.
We did not have high taxes on the wealthy for most of that history. In fact, the income tax only arrived to stay after 1913.
So what are the factors and principles that explain America's success? Evidently, failure to confiscate enough wealth from our most valuable producers doesn't enter into it.
Last edited by marcopolo; 12-10-2011 at 03:22 PM..
Obama has in fact done very little at all. The disfunctional congress has pretty much obstructed everything the president would have wanted to do. To hold the president to blame for today's problems in the country is just plain total STUPIDITY.
A lot of what Obama wanted to do we have already done here in Canada and guess what? It's works and it works well. The party of obstruction has no ideas at all, just none, zero, ziltch Nada and if you don't think that is true then just listen to the next GOP debate.
The right's biggest fear is if they would have let the country try the policies that Obama would like to try they just might be successful. That's correct, these traitors would rather see the country in total turmoil than have the problems solved by some one else. The best thing that could ever happen in the USA is for the GOP to disappear entirely The country obviously needs a good conservative alternative but it's not this gang of nitwits that's for sure. If you take the whole gang of them and add up in total their ability to move the country forward you will still be going in reverse because they have no interests outside of their own very narrow and selfish ones. If you are unable to see that then you are blind.
In order for trickle down to work, the wealthy would have to invest the the tax breaks they receive. In a way, the capitalist system we live in today is trickle down. The wealthy invest their money into businesses and in return create jobs for us to earn money.
The notion that rich people create jobs is baloney. You and I create jobs through demand. When my car needs repair, my mechanic has a job; when I want to eat, either the supermarket or the restaurant create jobs.
There is no evidence whatsoever that there has been greater investment in the times when trickle down economics was fashionable. As any scientist will tell you, a theory must be observable and repeatable. Trickle down has neither making its claims questionable. The righties use the trickle down theory as a con to justify to Congress and the people that lowering taxes on the rich would benefit everyone, which is contrary to common sense and also practice.
Trickle down economic theory is really a re-hash of “marginal-productivity theory.” Marginal-productivity theory was used by economists long ago to justify the vast inequalities that seemed so troubling in the mid-19th century (but nothing like what exists today.) As economist Joseph Stiglitz writes,
Quote:
In a nutshell, this theory associated higher incomes with higher productivity and a greater contribution to society. It is a theory that has always been cherished by the rich. Evidence for its validity, however, remains thin. The corporate executives who helped bring on the recession of the past three years—whose contribution to our society, and to their own companies, has been massively negative—went on to receive large bonuses. In some cases, companies were so embarrassed about calling such rewards “performance bonuses” that they felt compelled to change the name to “retention bonuses” (even if the only thing being retained was bad performance). Those who have contributed great positive innovations to our society, from the pioneers of genetic understanding to the pioneers of the Information Age, have received a pittance compared with those responsible for the financial innovations that brought our global economy to the brink of ruin.
Obama has in fact done very little at all. The disfunctional congress has pretty much obstructed everything the president would have wanted to do. To hold the president to blame for today's problems in the country is just plain total STUPIDITY.
A lot of what Obama wanted to do we have already done here in Canada and guess what? It's works and it works well. The party of obstruction has no ideas at all, just none, zero, ziltch Nada and if you don't think that is true then just listen to the next GOP debate.
The right's biggest fear is if they would have let the country try the policies that Obama would like to try they just might be successful. That's correct, these traitors would rather see the country in total turmoil than have the problems solved by some one else. The best thing that could ever happen in the USA is for the GOP to disappear entirely The country obviously needs a good conservative alternative but it's not this gang of nitwits that's for sure. If you take the whole gang of them and add up in total their ability to move the country forward you will still be going in reverse because they have no interests outside of their own very narrow and selfish ones. If you are unable to see that then you are blind.
Nice rant. It seems to take for granted that action by the national government is what is needed for the US to be successful. If you believe as I do that action by the national government is often counterproductive and wasteful, then the current "gang of nitwits" has rendered great service by constipating the system. They have prevented the excretion of more wasteful and counterproductive programs.
There is no fear of Obama's proposals being succesful. There is much concern that continuing the same failed policies and the small-minded, pessimistic philosophy that animates those policies would result in even more crushing debt in an economy strangled by ideological idiocy.
As a Canadian, how does Obama's job-killing obstruction of the Keystone pipeline help you? I hope the "gang of nitwits" is able to foil that nonsense, as well.
The notion that rich people create jobs is baloney. You and I create jobs through demand. When my car needs repair, my mechanic has a job; when I want to eat, either the supermarket or the restaurant create jobs....
Oh, thank you so much for creating jobs!
I would have guessed that those gutsy people who signed the lease, took on the burden of payroll, stumbled through the regulatory thicket, paid everything from occupation tax to unemployment insurance tax, figured out everything from purchasing to scheduling and every other operational detail, faced the competition...I would have guessed they created the jobs.
We should all be very grateful to you and all other consumers, whose needs automatically create jobs as if with a magic wand. Can people send you their applications for employment?
Nice rant. It seems to take for granted that action by the national government is what is needed for the US to be successful. If you believe as I do that action by the national government is often counterproductive and wasteful, then the current "gang of nitwits" has rendered great service by constipating the system. They have prevented the excretion of more wasteful and counterproductive programs.
There is no fear of Obama's proposals being succesful. There is much concern that continuing the same failed policies and the small-minded, pessimistic philosophy that animates those policies would result in even more crushing debt in an economy strangled by ideological idiocy.
As a Canadian, how does Obama's job-killing obstruction of the Keystone pipeline help you? I hope the "gang of nitwits" is able to foil that nonsense, as well.
We can see ideological hostility to the very idea of using government to serve the public good. For 30 years the right has been denigrating the public sector, telling us that government is always the problem, not the solution.
The fact is that the federal government is a massive tool that has in the past responded to the wants and needs of citizens. If it were left to the states, minorities and women wouldn't have full rights; we would be eating tainted food; be subjected to exploitation by corporations, etc. Without the social safety-net programs that are now helping millions of the unemployed with aid, there would likely be civil unrest and rioting. Without the actions of the Federal Reserve, we would be in the midst of massive deflation now.
The meme that everything would be better if it were unregulated ignores the test of history.
More to the point of the original post, the right isn't afraid that Obama's policies will fail -- for they would love him to implement policies that failed, so they can point at him. Instead, they're afraid that Obama policies will succeed and thereby discredit their entire ideology that government is always the problem, not the solution.
How did you get the money for that car...or to take it to the mechanic....
Was the money given to you? Are you a trust fund baby?
I have the money I have due to working...and guess what, the owner is rich...good for him...If I did not work a rich guy, I would have no money...
That's the nature of the economy, stupid. Rich people don't sit around and decide to hire other people. They see demand and hire as few as they need in order to make money.
Dec. 1 (Bloomberg) -- It is a tenet of American economic beliefs, and an article of faith for Republicans that is seldom contested by Democrats: If taxes are raised on the rich, job creation will stop.
Trouble is, sometimes the things that we know to be true are dead wrong. For the larger part of human history, for example, people were sure that the sun circles the Earth and that we are at the center of the universe. It doesn’t, and we aren’t. The conventional wisdom that the rich and businesses are our nation’s “job creators” is every bit as false.
I’m a very rich person. As an entrepreneur and venture capitalist, I’ve started or helped get off the ground dozens of companies in industries including manufacturing, retail, medical services, the Internet and software. I founded the Internet media company aQuantive Inc., which was acquired by Microsoft Corp. in 2007 for $6.4 billion. I was also the first non-family investor in Amazon.com Inc.
Even so, I’ve never been a “job creator.” I can start a business based on a great idea, and initially hire dozens or hundreds of people. But if no one can afford to buy what I have to sell, my business will soon fail and all those jobs will evaporate.
That’s why I can say with confidence that rich people don’t create jobs, nor do businesses, large or small. What does lead to more employment is the feedback loop between customers and businesses. And only consumers can set in motion a virtuous cycle that allows companies to survive and thrive and business owners to hire. An ordinary middle-class consumer is far more of a job creator than I ever have been or ever will be.
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.
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.
