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.
Because trickle down works. Show me real substantial proof how it doesn't work. You have a boss right? He pays you right? If he makes more money or gets more tax breaks he can expand his company and hire more workers. TRICKLE DOWN.
Come on... that's too complicated for the liberals to understand. You will have to dumb it down a little. And I do mean dumb it down!
Ronald Reagan said it was good. If Ronald Reagan says it's good, then it's good. End of discussion. And God Bless America!
Trickle down works very well at creating revenue and roaring economies.
The problem is the other end of the spectrum.
The spending.
Creating more and more spending expenditures, nullifies the whole thing.
It gets really bad when spending is increased dramatically and trickle down can't keep up.
Reagan had to spend to build our military up, to look mean and badass, before he told the Soviet's to tear down the wall.
Once Russia was no longer a physical threat, Clinton cut way back on our military. Closing bases left and right all over the nation.
We get hit 9-11-01 and Bush started military spending again.
It is the spending the nullifies all the good trickle down does.
Stop spending and you will see trickle down make you wealthy.
I think the whole trickle up / trickle down thing. It's too simplified, can't control all the other factors and unknowns that make an economy expand or contract. Having said that as a policy I can't see that has ever worked. Every time we've tried it it has been accompanied by massive deficit spending. I think a fair evaluation would be to look at the income gap over the last 30 years or so. So, FAIL imo.
I'd like to think outside of the box for a moment.
If the wealthy have money, what do they presumably do in trickle-down economics? They spend it on finding ways to make more of it. They make more money by selling products and services that are in demand. This can result in creation of jobs which trickles down money to the middle class.
If the middle class have money, what do they presumably do in trickle-up economics? They spend their money, driving demand. Therefore, business owners will have a plethora of citizens with extra spending money on their hands and would be more than happy selling these workers flat screen TVs, new automobiles, food, new homes, HVAC units, food, services and will gladly accept those middle-class investments into business.
Honestly, that sounds like a much healthier economy to me.
And don't forget the wealthy are the big consumers which in turn is demand. Demand creates jobs. When they buy that vacation home someone has to build it, furnish it etc.When the buy that new car every year. etc.
my fairly uneducated belief is that, the rich create jobs, which puts money in the pockets of those who choose to work. those that choose to work, end up with money to spend on what they desire. those that receive their hard earned money use it as they desire. seems like a great cycle to me...
i'm definitely not one of those who strives to be in that top 1% or 20% of the wealthy...i strive to make enough money to be comfortable paying my bills and provide for my family. i think in the large scheme of things, most would fall in line with the same "strives" as myself.
there will always be those who will want to own the next biggest company, and make more money than they'd ever need. just like there will always be people like myself. just like there will always be people who don't give a rats ass, and will scrape by however they're able.
trickle down just makes more sense to me, than the opposite...success should be rewarded, and that reward comes from people buying their product or service.
where would the trickle up come from? it would make more sense to me to reward the wealthy for charitable donations, rather than taxing them to ensure charitable donations...just a note, i don't believe in corporate welfare, just as much as i think social welfare is broken and needs to be fixed.
The rich per se do NOT create jobs. There is nothing inherent with being rich that makes a person a job creator.
Investors create jobs based on two things; one, the belief there is a demand for services and products that will be profitable. Two, they can supply a particular product or service for a profit. In a global economy investors can also invest WHERE THERE IS THE GREATEST RETURN FOR THEIR INVESTMENT DOLLAR.
If labor cost is cheaper outside in the United States then why not invest where the labor cost are cheaper? If consumer markets are growing faster in other countries then why focus your efforts in building your sales and distribution efforts in slower growing markets?
What we are seeing quite frankly is that the United States in many cases NO LONGER PROVIDES THE GREATEST RETURN ON INVESTMENT DOLLARS when it comes to investing in factories, new products or new services or sales and distribution channels.
Trickle down makes no sense when middle class incomes have stagnated for the last 30 years and for the past 10 years corproations have done far more investment outside the United States than they have inside. What the corproations and wealthiest people in this country have basically done is kept more of their money for themselves and invested more of it outside the United States. If you give them MORE MONEY they are going to continue to do the same thing.
And don't forget the wealthy are the big consumers which in turn is demand. Demand creates jobs. When they buy that vacation home someone has to build it, furnish it etc.When the buy that new car every year. etc.
On a percentage bases the middle class spends more of their dollars on consumption that rich people do. American has enjoyed its greatest period of economic prosperity i.e. the 1960's when middle class consumption and income growth are higher. American sees its worst economic times i.e. the recession from the 1970’s to early 1980’s and the current economic downturn when middle class income and consumption take serious decline.
The reason the economy is stagnant right now is not because the rich are not spending enough money. It's because middle class income and job growth have been stifled.
If the fastest growing economies in the world these days the critical indicator of economic growth is more people entering the middle class and increases in middle class income.
Trickle down... someting I've seen work.. Businessman has a business.. Business man gets tax relief.. Business man is now able to afford more workers. Business man hires more workers.
Business man gets hit with more taxes.. Business man can't afford to hire more workers. Business man makes current workers work twice as hard.
Is it perfect - no.
Do the middle and lower class get "richer" - no
Is there something better - haven't come across anything - so wouldnt know.
The one thing people forget is - we are a society and always will be a society of GREED. The business owner/runners/board of directors WILL get their cut before anyone else does.. When you try to take a chunk of that cut - the rest of the workers will pay for it - in one way or another.
If you don't believe that - then look at your own lifestyle and income and own up to your own greed. You (we) always want more and are less willing to "trickle down" our own money. HOWEVER.. it is a known fact that when the economy is good charities receive more donations - thus the trickle down reaches those who are homeless or in dire need.
If you can't afford to donate $20 - you won't.. if you can - you will... its called trickle down.
The fallacy in your thinkinng is NO BUSINESS HIRES MORE WORKERS IF THERE IS NOT A GREATER DEMAND FOR THEIR PRODUCTS OR SERVICES.
The second issue is BUSINESSES HIRE WHERE LABOR IS THE CHEAPEST AND THERE IS THE GREATEST DEMAND FOR THEIR PRODUCTS OR SERVICES.
THAT CURRENTLY IS NOT THE UNITED STATES.
The only this the Bush Tax Cuts did is give businesses more money to invest in overseas market and higher profits to keep for themselves.
Because trickle down works. Show me real substantial proof how it doesn't work. You have a boss right? He pays you right? If he makes more money or gets more tax breaks he can expand his company and hire more workers. TRICKLE DOWN.
For "Tricke Down" to work then some money has to trickle down.
Income growth over the last few decades has been enormously unbalanced, and this must be taken into account as the nation considers shifts in tax policy and develops a fiscal plan that strengthens the recovery and targets a sustainable deficit. According to the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and the start of the current recession in 2007, the pre-tax incomes of the upper 1% grew 214%, while the incomes of the middle-fifth and lowest-fifth grew, respectively, 25% and 4%. As the Chart shows, this extremely unbalanced growth implies that 38.7% of all of the income growth accrued to the upper 1% over the 1979-2007 period: a greater share than the 36.3% share received by the entire bottom 90% of the population.
There IS NO TRICKLE DOWN!
Trickle Down Economics is nothing more than the Republican Party telling the United States it's raining while they've and their wealthiest cronies and corporations are pissing on us.
THE VERY DEFINTION OF INSANTITY IS DOING THE SAME THING AND EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS!
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.
