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.
Trickle down economics is based on tax cuts. Tax cuts are not the sideline, they are the centerpiece of the theory.
Good night.
No, this is the argument of the partisan zealot. The entire QE programs were nothing but attempts at trickle down. You are talking many times more money there than any tax cuts.
Come on, trickle down was used to justify lowering the highest earners' tax rates by Reagan. It did not work in the 1920s (the roaring 20s led right to the crash), nor did it work in the 1980s, nor did it work in the 2000s. What releasing that extra capital at the top does best is fuel speculative bubbles. Or at least that is the lesson of the history of the last century in American economics.
When we cut taxes, the government took in more money. That is not trickle down. That is the opposite. That is why you cut taxes. The government tried trickle down with the QE programs and the stimulus programs and they failed absolutely miserably but there is a certain segment that want to blame that failure not on the government but some vague argument about it being the "richs" fault.
Investors would be better off putting cash in the mattress.
It is. This is what many here refuse to accept. The government enacted programs to re-inflate the markets in the idea that it would then trickle down. This can not work because the government can only take from someone to give to someone else.
The government has taken from main street to give to wall street in an absolutely awful attempt to get it to trickle back down. Even if it had you are only giving the money you took from people in the first place back to them.
You then have the Dems crying for more of this failed affort while their supporters try and blame it on everyone but where it belongs. On the government.
Funny thing about the rich being "afraid" to hire with Obama in office, so we need more upper crust tax cuts, is why give an opportunity to a bunch of wusses. If the wealthy were so bold and altruistic, and deserving of special consideration, why are they such patsies? That is not leadership.
You don't hire when the markets are not calling for it. This is one of the reasons GM got in the mess they did. THey were forced to keep people on the payrolls when there was no need for them.
Is this really that hard to grasp? Employers are not going to start hiring until people start buying. People can't afford to buy because of the artificial inflation the government is creating to re-inflate the markets.
If the government had not done this, everything would be less expensive today. Yep, the markets may still be around 10k but so what? Do you care? No, neither do I. It's not supposed to be a gauranteed thing but gas would still be $2 something. The price of everything else including food wouldn't be going up so fast. People would have more money to spend, employers would hire, the markets would go up.
But no, the government had to screw up the way things are supposed to work. This was a very bi-partisan screw up.
If we allowed interest rates to rise, those who had to find a job because their savings were no longer providing income could get back to being retired. With money in their pockets and seeing the rates rising, people would know that now was the time to start buying houses, cars, etc. More people are then hired.
But no, we have to continue to provide free money to the banks and wall street.
I'm just wondering when the economy is suppose to start improving? I was told that if those at the top make more it would lead to gains for the poor and middle class. Why is that not happening?
It is happening. Our 401k and IRA accounts are growing nicely. Thank you big business for improving profits.
It is. This is what many here refuse to accept. The government enacted programs to re-inflate the markets in the idea that it would then trickle down. This can not work because the government can only take from someone to give to someone else.
The government has taken from main street to give to wall street in an absolutely awful attempt to get it to trickle back down. Even if it had you are only giving the money you took from people in the first place back to them.
You then have the Dems crying for more of this failed affort while their supporters try and blame it on everyone but where it belongs. On the government.
It worked for the Solyndra executives. Obama "trickled down" 535 million dollars to his buddies at Solyndra.
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.
