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.
I’m not trolling. Nor am I saying to legislate anyone up the social ladder. I’m saying trickle down economics is a scam. But it’s aptly named. The rich get drenched, you get a trickle.
but trickle down does work...it allows for people to succeed...
the trickle up poverty of the left does not work, it means doomsday for all (except the politicians)
The USA is falling against Europe for quite some time.
In the 70s/80s, the USA had a middle class that faraway had a better standard of living. Now, not at all. Australia probably has the best middle class now.
But in reality, GDP per capita (PPP) tells only part of the picture. Europeans generally work less for this similar GDP per capita, have healthcare, and more paid vacation time. They also don't worry about paying for college education! As a result they live longer, despite Americans spending more on healthcare (this includes government expenditure in both cases)...
Not sure how $59.9K is "basically tied" with $52.6K
Regardless, I'm not sure how one conflates GDP into income and the consequent benefits - healthcare, hours/weeks worked, take-home pay, etc.
Now, if you wish to delve into median pay or better yet, median net pay in the US vs Germany, we could get somewhere.
"It's relatively simple, and applies across all income groups that will take a marginal $ and invest it:
1. The Federal government takes a $1, and turns it into about 80 cents of "benefits".
2. If you put $1 and invested it in an index fund in a typical market, you will turn it into $1.08 in a year.
Which number is larger: $0.80 or $1.08?"
Since you know, the principle behind the Democrat trope of "trickle down" is that if you remove tax barriers and unneeded regulation on the top, then the top will take that "extra money" and "easier to reasonably conduct business" and do so.
When the Reagan tax cuts took effect, did the "rich" actually pay more and pay a higher % of taxes or not? The answer is yes.
When the TCJIA took effect, did the rich actually pay more and pay a higher % of taxes or not? Again, the answer is yes.
Stimmy 1 is such a fantastic example of what happens when you give different economic groups $1. You'll enjoy this article, and since you probably paid little attention (since surely you received no stimmy) it will be enlightening.
"It's relatively simple, and applies across all income groups that will take a marginal $ and invest it:
1. The Federal government takes a $1, and turns it into about 80 cents of "benefits".
2. If you put $1 and invested it in an index fund in a typical market, you will turn it into $1.08 in a year.
Which number is larger: $0.80 or $1.08?"
Since you know, the principle behind the Democrat trope of "trickle down" is that if you remove tax barriers and unneeded regulation on the top, then the top will take that "extra money" and "easier to reasonably conduct business" and do so.
When the Reagan tax cuts took effect, did the "rich" actually pay more and pay a higher % of taxes or not? The answer is yes.
When the TCJA took effect, did the rich actually pay more and pay a higher % of taxes or not? Again, the answer is yes.
Stimmy 1 is such a fantastic example of what happens when you give different economic groups $1. You'll enjoy this article, and since you probably paid little attention (since surely you received no stimmy) it will be enlightening.
Correct. The Trump tax cuts caused higher income earners to pay an even higher percentage of the total federal income tax revenue. In 2017, filers earning $500,000 or more paid 38.9% of all personal federal income tax revenues. In 2018, the same income bracket paid 41.5%. There was no tax cut for the rich. They paid more.
Correct. The Trump tax cuts caused higher income earners to pay an even higher percentage of the total federal income tax revenue. In 2017, filers earning $500,000 or more paid 38.9% of all personal federal income tax revenues. In 2018, the same income bracket paid 41.5%. There was no tax cut for the rich. They paid more.
They paid more as a percentage because they made most to all the gains. The middle class percentage has continued to shrink as their incomes therefore taxable incomes have stagnated during the same time we have had huge gains at the end of our economy. This is happening while productivity from the middle class continues to rise, so more work but less of a share of the profits., hence lower percentage of total taxes paid.
I would expect to see those at the top pay a higher percentage of the total taxes because that is the only group seeing real gains in income, everyone else is flat or has been flat for decades.
Its a direct sign that gains are funneling to the top with very little trickling down to the middle class.
They paid more as a percentage because they made most to all the gains.
Incorrect. The LOWEST income groups made the most gains. Here's what happened after Trump's tax cuts:
Quote:
The middle class percentage has continued to shrink as their incomes therefore taxable incomes have stagnated during the same time we have had huge gains at the end of our economy. This is happening while productivity from the middle class continues to rise, so more work but less of a share of the profits, hence lower percentage of total taxes paid.
The middle class is getting squeezed but not necessarily because of taxes.
It's other things -- healthcare, daycare, college costs, and out of control housing prices that are doing it, IMO
I owned (or was prominent share holder) of 3 different businesses in the medical device sector. Hard to say how many jobs I solely created as I had partners/other investors, but maybe 1000+ is probable, especially if you count the distributors!
Laziness and whining is not the issue, corruption and rigging the rules is!
I'm retired. Retired at 53. I currently primarily live in Cap d'Ail (French Riviera) but have homes in Miami Beach and a lodge in Switzerland. I'm writing this from French Polynesia on a 3 week vacation.
You can make this about me, but you will lose.
Doesn't your own experience (if true) prove that "trickle down" works?
Are you telling me that if you have more money, you won't use that money to create more wealth?
Yup, you don’t even need to be talented. Right now one can go buy a car wash, laundromat, vending machine, ATM, or other small business for sale at the push of a button and they didn’t even need to build it. All they had to do was Google “small businesses for sale.” Now they’re a turnkey businesses owner.
Woke folks just don’t realize how easy it is to make money in America, they rather whine at the entrepreneurs who took all the risks.
Yes. Very easy to buy just about anything, including a business, from your phone.
You left out the part that you need to accumulate some amount of money first, before you can buy things. A lot of people cant get to that first step because the wealth has not trickled down enough for them to save the first stash. .
Last edited by ansible90; 08-15-2022 at 10:51 AM..
"It's relatively simple, and applies across all income groups that will take a marginal $ and invest it:
1. The Federal government takes a $1, and turns it into about 80 cents of "benefits".
2. If you put $1 and invested it in an index fund in a typical market, you will turn it into $1.08 in a year.
Which number is larger: $0.80 or $1.08?"
Since you know, the principle behind the Democrat trope of "trickle down" is that if you remove tax barriers and unneeded regulation on the top, then the top will take that "extra money" and "easier to reasonably conduct business" and do so.
When the Reagan tax cuts took effect, did the "rich" actually pay more and pay a higher % of taxes or not? The answer is yes.
When the TCJIA took effect, did the rich actually pay more and pay a higher % of taxes or not? Again, the answer is yes.
Stimmy 1 is such a fantastic example of what happens when you give different economic groups $1. You'll enjoy this article, and since you probably paid little attention (since surely you received no stimmy) it will be enlightening.
To generate 8% profit, he must generate a whole lot more VALUE and WEALTH for other people, and he must pay all the vendors, employees, and contractors IMMEDIATELY. So, his $1.00 investment has a HUGE positive impact on society, much more than the 8%.
The net benefit of government welfare is negative if we are not counting breeding more leeches and opportunity costs. On the other hand, "allowing" people to keep their own money will SIGNIFICANTLY improve our life.
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.
