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.
USD has value because the US government exists and has been stable over long periods. Money doesn’t have value out of thin air.
That has nothing to do with people's assets. People simply use the dollar as a store of value for THEIR assets and as a transactional medium. If the US government stopped using the dollar or started printing it non-stop like Zimbabwe, people would simply move their wealth from US dollar to other mediums and stop accepting it to make any transactions. Just because people use the dollar as a store of value doesn't mean the government actually owns your assets....that's just silly. US dollar has worth because people decided it does. If people decide US dollar is worth the same as toilet paper then it will worth that much.
So the whole premise of Trickle Down Economics, and the current Trump Tax increase on the middle class so he can give cuts to the ultra-rich is that if you make the rich, richer, they will create jobs and it will benefit the middle and lower class. Is that right?....
Dear, I've got some news for you.
Trickle Down Economics hasn't existed since Bill Clinton signed Joe Biden's NAFTA and began the great exporting of our manufacturing and industrial base to Mexico, China, India, etc. And now we have cities like Baltimore as a result.
That has nothing to do with people's assets. People simply use the dollar as a store of value for THEIR assets and as a transactional medium. If the US government stopped using the dollar or started printing it non-stop like Zimbabwe, people would simply move their wealth from US dollar to other mediums and stop accepting it to make any transactions. Just because people use the dollar as a store of value doesn't mean the government actually owns your assets....that's just silly. US dollar has worth because people decided it does. If people decide US dollar is worth the same as toilet paper then it will worth that much.
Sure, but neither is it the case that a person selling their labor in the market occurs independently from the government. There was a time when “money” (as we know it) didn’t exist, and markets were quite a bit more volatile.
Well Let's see, Ron R added 16.5 Million Jobs in his 8 years, B.O added 8.9 million in his 8 years and Trump has added 4.7 million in his first 2 years. So to say that jobs under RR and Trump aren't being created is just flat wrong. And I have yet to see a "poor" person create a job yet, so my guess is the "rich" are the ones creating jobs. So your thread is just flat wrong. 2 years in and already more than 50% of the 8 year total for BO.. not bad Trump, not bat at all.
Sure, but neither is it the case that a person selling their labor in the market occurs independently from the government. There was a time when “money” (as we know it) didn’t exist, and markets were quite a bit more volatile.
That doesn't mean the government owns your labor, or the assets you accrue with your labor.
There are various economic systems throughout history when the government indeed owned your labor. Most peasants under feudalism were owned by their lord. Communism is another such system, where all wealth generated from the people is owned by the government. The politicians then redistribute all of the income as they see fit.
The question is hereby rejected, as it was predicated on a gross misunderstanding of the recent tax cuts.
The Trump tax cuts merely allowed the working class to keep more of their money. What they chose to do with their tax savings was entirely up to them, as it should have been.
That's why I couldn't answer OP query because it's based on a false premise. I do think we need to control spending and only give tax cuts with spending reductions to balance it out.
Many of the current liberal candidates want to do as you describe (I am not for it, not on the scale they are promoting).
Conservatives since Reagan have stagnated income growth of the American worker and redistributed it to the richest of rich. I have posted the graph so many times, but if you want to look it up, just google something like "income gap by year" and see what you get, starting around 1980 until present.
How are they redistributing to the rich? Name ONE way.
I did not click on all your links, but I read one (The first one, I think), and all it did was say how it's a lie, but never said what the truth is. The fact is that both Reagan and Trump based their economic strategy on the trickle-down effect. I think Reagan called it "Supply side economics", but in both cases, the case was made that if you leave employers and other ultra rich with more money, they'll spend it to cause more demand, and trump specifically said employers will use it to hire more people. They didn't. Call it whatever you want, the premise of my argument is taken from the source.
Don't believe me, see the VERY NEXT POST:
I will give you that the money never entered the beaurocracy, but it does not negate my premise. The "money saved" was never spent as promised, and the cost to tax payers was HUGE. Just the bureaucratic expense of redoing the tax laws at the last minute cost us all. As did the cost of increasing the defecit, which this ill-conceived policy did. I know you'll defend it anyway, so I'll leave it at that.
WRONG: If you have a deficit, and you decrease revenue, your deficit grows faster than it would have otherwise. For your stupid analogy, it is more like saying that my spending all my savings on lotto tickets, while ignoring that I was already in debt caused me to go bankrupt. Because that is exactly what Trump is doing. He's gambling on something that has a proven track record of failure, while we are already badly in debt. It is more like voluteering for a pay cut when you are in debt, and then scratching your head trying to figure out why you are closer to bankruptcy.
I got it from my 1040. The decrease in my refund more than offset any amount more I took home. And that does not take into account that my so-called 'cut' is temporary, while the corporate giveaway is permenent. So while I lost moderate amounts this year, in future years, when the full tax increase is in effect, it will be worse. #winning.
Apparently not paying attention to the unemployment rate lately.
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.
