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.
Ask yourself this.....if the obama administration is so concerned with the "middle class", why are the poor getting more, the Wall Street types getting more, but you're getting less?
It's into his 5th year, and things are worse than when he started.
No one has ever proposed trickle down economics, the libs made that up so they can trot it out as an easy strawdog, and then beat it to death.
It was misappropriated from Will Rogers: "The money was all appropriated for the top in the hopes that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover didn’t know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellow’s hands.”
Yes I know the idea behind it and it has the assumption that rich people add to supply and since poorer people in order to play along would need to see themselves supplied would they not?
So, do the rich, just by having more money, add to the supply of the lessor classes?
The argument to the positive is they are experienced decision makers and have a low marginal propensity to consume which nets positive since people tend consume a shade more than needed.
Its all very logical and unfortunately wrong because the premise is wrong. Value is in the eye of the beholder and even the marginalist will grant you this. Worse still is value , again and admission of the marginalists, has nothing to do with material creation of labor put into it. Thus the rich add value to their own interests without supply.
If for example I blow up a competitors warehouse, which would take money, I have reduced total supply and added value to my own.
What of the rising value of land? Does that create supply?
The rent of land, therefore, considered as the price paid for the use of the land, is naturally a monopoly price. It is not at all proportioned to what the landlord may have laid out upon the improvement of the land, or to what he can afford to take; but to what the farmer can afford to give.
-Smith
So all the Fed is doing with ZIRP is jacking up monopoly prices that the rich "invest in". Since its monopoly they are investing in, there is no supply.
Since we do have high unemployment for over four years now, then the theory that high rent is to blame is clearly not valid.
Au contraire, some parts of the country have high unemployment AND high rents. In Portland, young underemployed college graduates come to town, work as baristas and drive up rents, which rose 8% to 10% from 2010 to 2011.
Maybe because people who are employed as "burger flippers" are working in entry level positions, and these are not permanent careers, that place the person into a "class" system for the rest of their lives.
No. This particular poster has admitted to making prior bad decisions and to a lack of an effort to improve his situation. That's the problem.
I really don't know what 'bad' decisions I have made. I stayed in school, got great grades, didn't do crime or kids out of wedlock or drugs or gangs or any of those Really Bad Things people describe as Culture of Poverty.
And I would jump at the chance to go back to school and learn a skill, where do I sign up?
The rules that the federal government put in place are making the rich richer. It's very, very tough to get small business loans, personal loans and mortgages now since the government has poisoned the waters.
Do you actually think that the stock market is based on a good economy? That these people with ties to the government will throw money out of windows to the masses?
Ask yourself this.....if the obama administration is so concerned with the "middle class", why are the poor getting more, the Wall Street types getting more, but you're getting less?
It's into his 5th year, and things are worse than when he started.
One of the unintended consequences of over taxation and regulation, are the mountains of paperwork and obstacles that are thrust into the way of the average person trying to start a business. We are making it so difficult that only the people who were lucky enough to make it a decade or more ago, are able to afford the capital investments to expand their wealth.
For example, people wanted Obama to end the depletion allowance for oil companies. What the people did not realize is that the big multinational oil companies were not allowed this tax deduction, only the smaller independent oil companies could use it. Killing that deduction would ensure that the Exxons of the world would be the only game in town.
So as we fall for this "get the rich" crap from our government and they tax and regulate the people to death. All we end up doing is ensuring the money stays in the hands of the few, and not for you. So as the Wall Street fat cats become a smaller, wealthier group, the people are happy collecting their meager trickle down scraps from government.
Supply and demand. If you're unwilling to work, and/or unwilling to make the effort to increase your income, you'll be left in the dust. Fact of life.
In a free market, people like you would not be able to prevent a willing property owner from selling me a home I can afford to buy, which would allow me to stabilize my housing costs (escape rent inflation) and build a business over time.
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.
