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.
Interesting historical perspective on the issue from the Richmond Times-Dispatch:
<<They managed this con job partly with a propaganda technique that will be familiar to modern Americans, but hasn’t received the coverage it deserves in our sesquicentennial celebrations. Starting in the 1840s wealthy Southerners supported more than 30 regional pro-slavery magazines, many pamphlets, newspapers and novels that falsely touted slave ownership as having benefits that would – in today’s lingo – trickle down to benefit non-slave owning whites and even blacks. The flip side of the coin of this old-is-new trickle-down propaganda is the mistaken notion that any gain by blacks in wages, schools or health care comes at the expense of the white working class.
Today’s version of this con job no longer supports slavery, but still works in the South and thrives in pro trickle-down think tanks, magazines, newspapers, talk radio and TV news shows such as the Cato Foundation, Reason magazine, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. These sources are underwritten by pro trickle-down one-per-centers like the Koch brothers and Rupert Murdoch.
For example, a map of states that didn’t expand Medicaid – which would actually be a boon mostly to poor whites – resembles a map of the old Confederacy with a few other poor, rural states thrown in. Another indication that this divisive propaganda works on Southern whites came in 2012. Romney and Obama evenly split the white working class in the West, Midwest and Northeast. But in the South we went 2-1 for Romney.>>
Interesting article on the moon being made out of cheese.
There is no such economic theory as trickle down. It was made up and boobus fell for it. When companies have extra money we the people see it right away. We get hired, promotions and more product is produced. In down times that money is used to keep employees on board as the cost of training new employees is a high expense.
Interesting historical perspective on the issue from the Richmond Times-Dispatch:
<<They managed this con job partly with a propaganda technique that will be familiar to modern Americans, but hasn’t received the coverage it deserves in our sesquicentennial celebrations. Starting in the 1840s wealthy Southerners supported more than 30 regional pro-slavery magazines, many pamphlets, newspapers and novels that falsely touted slave ownership as having benefits that would – in today’s lingo – trickle down to benefit non-slave owning whites and even blacks. The flip side of the coin of this old-is-new trickle-down propaganda is the mistaken notion that any gain by blacks in wages, schools or health care comes at the expense of the white working class.
Today’s version of this con job no longer supports slavery, but still works in the South and thrives in pro trickle-down think tanks, magazines, newspapers, talk radio and TV news shows such as the Cato Foundation, Reason magazine, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. These sources are underwritten by pro trickle-down one-per-centers like the Koch brothers and Rupert Murdoch.
For example, a map of states that didn’t expand Medicaid – which would actually be a boon mostly to poor whites – resembles a map of the old Confederacy with a few other poor, rural states thrown in. Another indication that this divisive propaganda works on Southern whites came in 2012. Romney and Obama evenly split the white working class in the West, Midwest and Northeast. But in the South we went 2-1 for Romney.>>
FOX news has done more damage to the USA than any war we have ever fought. And by a very large margin.
FOX has held this nations workers in virtual slavery. ( i blame fox because it presents a false view of the usa places blame at the feet of anyone trying to help the average american family.)
Americans don't even live as long as europeans,
Americans have more poverty problems ,
Americans work much longer hours ,
Americans get less vacation ,
Americans work more years.
Americans more likley to go to jail.
Sure hard work can be better rewarded here , there is no doubt about it. Merit matters in the USA. But the price is high risk .
Americans live a much more risky life, they trade their years, but mostly can be fired any day of the week with little to no compensation nor reason given. Employment at will is an abuse of labor.
Americans live with some of the worst social safty nets of any developed wealthy nation. Here you can lose your home because you got sick and your employer just dumped you, just because they did not like dealing with it.
sure there are some limited protections, but generally most states allow employers to let people go with no reason given.
yet when you say these things to Americans they are so brainwashed they instantly wrap themselves in the flag and suggest the offending person leave the USA...(I american and my family at least 150 years maybe a lot more just lazy.)
The only way that trickle-down wouldn't work is if rich people stuffed their money in their mattresses. But they don't. They either spend their money, which trickles down. Or they save/invest it, which also trickles down to people who take out loans or start/expand their companies.
It baffles me that we have people who are so ignorant that they can't comprehend simple economics.
That's the rub. Someone on TV who you don't know says another person, who you don't know, is an economic expert.
When ones theories stray from the basics those theories are garbage.
And technically it doesn't trickle down, we the people profit handsomely when companies are taxed less.
Your inability to make more money is no fault of anybody else but YOURS.
Workers absolutely pay less taxes than the rich by FAR.
Please name one government subsidies.
Tax breaks are enjoyed by everybody.
Companies and people who make no income pay zero income taxes. That's universal.
If the top 1 pct want to bear less of the tax burden they should be more interested in the bottom 99 pct getting into a higher tax bracket. If the mininum wage was where it should be federally I'd be all for those people paying more taxes.
If the top 1 pct want to bear less of the tax burden they should be more interested in the bottom 99 pct getting into a higher tax bracket. If the mininum wage was where it should be federally I'd be all for those people paying more taxes.
The top 1 percent pay almost half of all Federal income tax. People stealing my money for their causes is the root of all evil.
Whatever you want to call it... the source is from someone higher up on the scale that can afford to pay or give stuff to those on the bottom.
That's about as naive as the "I have never been hired by a poor person" line. Money moves laterally or uphill all the time.
I used to work for a movie studio. Hundreds of thousands of moviegoers, most of whom were quite low on the scale, could quite nonetheless afford to give my employer the price of a movie ticket. That money was mostly distributed to cover the costs of producing the movie - including the paychecks for the carpenters and janitors and whatnot. Some exceptionally gifted (luck is a gift, too) individuals would get a bigger cut of the distribution. That's as it should be, money flows in all directions in a healthy economy. The girl who works at Subway literally can afford to give Steven Spielberg his cut to enjoy a movie. Now, if the masses in the unwashed moviegoing public can't afford a movie ticket at the end of the week, the system collapses. It does no good to have a group of very rich people with cash to "invest" in making the next movie.
The premise in trickle-down economy is that if the very rich are made richer, it will somehow boost the economic machinery. (That makes it a popular theory among the rich and those who imagine that if they help the rich, they'll get their lick at the silver spoon, too.)
But as someone pointed out upthread, the billionaire doesn't buy a 1000 movie tickets every time a millionaire buys 1. Markets drive sound investment - having extra cash slushing around the system looking for a purpose doesn't. (It drives bubbles, but that's another story.)
Last edited by Dane_in_LA; 03-07-2017 at 02:45 PM..
When companies have extra money we the people see it right away. We get hired, promotions and more product is produced.
Ehm - expansion in workforce (promotions are part of that) and production happens when the market expands. A widget company can make more money by increasing widget prices, by lowering the wages on the widget assembly line workers, or by moving the widget production to South Korea, to name a few. This, in fact, happens all the time. And the "we" who see the extra money is more likely to be stockholders and senior executives.
That's about as naive as the "I have never been hired by a poor person" line. Money moves laterally or uphill all the time.
I used to work for a movie studio. Hundreds of thousands of moviegoers, most of whom were quite low on the scale, could quite nonetheless afford to give my employer the price of a movie ticket. That money was mostly distributed to cover the costs of producing the movie - including the paychecks for the carpenters and janitors and whatnot. Some exceptionally gifted (luck is a gift, too) individuals would get a bigger cut of the distribution. That's as it should be, money flows in all directions in a healthy economy. The girl who works at Subway literally can afford to give Steven Spielberg his cut to enjoy a movie. Now, if the masses in the unwashed moviegoing public can't afford a movie ticket at the end of the week, the system collapses. It does no good to have a group of very rich people with cash to "invest" in making the next movie.
The premise in trickle-down economy is that if the very rich are made richer, it will somehow boost the economic machinery. (That makes it a popular theory among the rich and those who imagine that if they help the rich, they'll get their lick at the silver spoon, too.)
But as someone pointed out upthread, the billionaire doesn't buy a 1000 movie tickets every time a millionaire buys 1. Markets drive investment - having extra cash around looking for a purpose doesn't. (It drives bubbles, but that's another story.)
How many Rolls Royce do the poor buy? How many mansions do the poor buy? That doesn't create jobs and get money into the economy?
So I guess the rich spending their money on one item is the important thing and not the total amount they spend.
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.
