• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Warren Buffet: 'Trickle Down' Theory Doesn't Work

If they're so poor, that they have to get welfare, then they can't afford a soda water. Besides, as the Libbos tell us, it's bad for them and as long as the goverment is picking up the tab for their healthcare, they have to live a 100% healthy lifestyle. Don't like it? Get the **** off welfare and pay for your own soda waters and your own healthcare, you own self.

Actually, it's almost exclusively right-wingers who use this argument.

However, since you obviously agree with this argument, then I have every right to insist that taxpayer-funded school lunch programs offer ONLY 100% healthy food/drink. All you righties and your whiny kids on board with that?
 
Actually he just slapped a new label on it. It was around in the late 1800's under the name "horse and sparrow" economics. Feed the horse all the berries, it leaves seeds for the birds. You can see why it was renamed.

Are you serious? If so? I did not know that. If not? Jokes on me:lol:
 
socialism hasn't worked either and has resulted in over 100 million people being murdered

punishing the rich doesn't make the poor more able to compete in a modern economic system

addicting people to government provided dependency doesn't make them prosperous either-in fact it prevents them from competing which is why people like Buffett support such nonsense


I feel making peeps that make more pay more taxes helps us all unless we want a fair flat rate tax system.

The days of people that do not need it being able to live off our government for life via social programs are over in case you did not know.

Giving people help so they can become productive members of our society is a good thing;)
 
Oh, please. :roll:

Rightwingers operate under the belief that if someone is poor, they should be denied even the remotest semblance of "frivolous luxuries."

Their definition of a "frivolous luxury?" An occasional freakin' soda.

:doh

LOL! The horror! I luvs you girl:)
 
Actually he just slapped a new label on it. It was around in the late 1800's under the name "horse and sparrow" economics. Feed the horse all the berries, it leaves seeds for the birds. You can see why it was renamed.

If trickle down economics doesn't work; what does?
 
If trickle down economics doesn't work; what does?

That's going to be situational, I expect. We've certainly got historical precedence to support the fact that pushing wealth upwards doesn't improve the life of everyone else.

Why? Trickle-down ignores the entire demand side of the equation. If a business doesn't have sufficient demand to justify a new hire, it's not going to hire. Give rich people all the money in the world, if there aren't more people buying whatever product or service they're trying to sell, they aren't hiring anybody. As far as the purchases that rich person makes, you get rapidly diminishing returns as income goes up. A man earning $2 million per year is not going to buy twice as many cars or twice as many televisions or twice as much booze as a person making $1 million. If I doubled my salary, on the other hand, I probably would buy twice as much booze!

Wait. That came out wrong.

Rich people having more money isn't what we need right now. What we need is average joes like me to buy more crap.
 
That's going to be situational, I expect. We've certainly got historical precedence to support the fact that pushing wealth upwards doesn't improve the life of everyone else.

Why? Trickle-down ignores the entire demand side of the equation. If a business doesn't have sufficient demand to justify a new hire, it's not going to hire. Give rich people all the money in the world, if there aren't more people buying whatever product or service they're trying to sell, they aren't hiring anybody. As far as the purchases that rich person makes, you get rapidly diminishing returns as income goes up. A man earning $2 million per year is not going to buy twice as many cars or twice as many televisions or twice as much booze as a person making $1 million. If I doubled my salary, on the other hand, I probably would buy twice as much booze!

Wait. That came out wrong.

Rich people having more money isn't what we need right now. What we need is average joes like me to buy more crap.

That's right and the government needs to get it's foot off the throat of small business, so they can get to work, create demand and hire more people.

Enacting a ban on drilling and riasing the taxes on tobacco didn't put more average joes out there to buy more crap. An anti business government isn't going to put more people to work, only less people.

It sounds like you're suggesting that instead of trickle down economics coming from the private sector, that it should come from the government.
 
How does raising taxes help? Please, be more specific.

They never will answer that. what we get is that the rich can afford more taxes. I guess the difference between us and the statist tax hikers is that we operate from the position that taxes are at best-a necessary evil and any increase in taxes must be justified by strict and rigorous proof while people like Deuce operate on the philisophy that all wealth belongs to the government first and we have to prove that tax hikes are bad.
 
I feel making peeps that make more pay more taxes helps us all unless we want a fair flat rate tax system.

The days of people that do not need it being able to live off our government for life via social programs are over in case you did not know.

Giving people help so they can become productive members of our society is a good thing;)

and subisidizing dependency on the government so those so addicted will generally vote for those who feed their habit is not a good thing.
 
Letting bush taxcuts roll back. That is what will work. Need proof? See late 90s.

no one yet has been able to prove that the clinton tax hikes were responsible for that ephemeral period of prosperity that was based on the dot com bubble and the belt tightening that corporations undertook in the last year of the Bush I administration

try again
 
apdst asks

How does raising taxes help? Please, be more specific.

and Turtle opines

They never will answer that.

its been answered more times that your probably can count to but you simply do not like the answer.
 
and subisidizing dependency on the government so those so addicted will generally vote for those who feed their habit is not a good thing.

So what would YOU do to stop these voters from doing this?
 
So what would YOU do to stop these voters from doing this?

easy

the first thing to do is to create a tax system where one group cannot vote up the rates of another group without paying more themselves. that would stop the pandering

secondly, we need to stop economic incentives for irresponsible parents to continue to breed.

third, those on the dole would be required to engage in public service-be it picking up trash on the highways or removing graffitti on buildings. yes there are some on the dole who cannot work but there are plenty who can. As a Young attorney I spent alot of time in "Room A" (arraignments) of the county courthouse and I saw lines of those on PA charged with all sorts of crimes. If you are fit enough to rob a hot dog stand operator or jack some guy's car you are fit enough to do some manual labor
 
apdst asks



and Turtle opines



its been answered more times that your probably can count to but you simply do not like the answer.

Refresh our memory. Or, just admit that none of you have a clue.
 
Refresh our memory. Or, just admit that none of you have a clue.

thats where the money is that is not going to basic needs of life.
 
from Turtle on his program to stop the 47% from taking his treasure and Picasso's off the marble walls

the first thing to do is to create a tax system where one group cannot vote up the rates of another group without paying more themselves. that would stop the pandering

Okay - lets do just that and call your bluff. We raise taxes on everyone in the tradition and spirit of our progressive tax system. Okay with you since its your idea in the first place?



secondly, we need to stop economic incentives for irresponsible parents to continue to breed.

What does that mean? It is so vague as be meaningless without any actual detail.

third, those on the dole would be required to engage in public service-be it picking up trash on the highways or removing graffitti on buildings. yes there are some on the dole who cannot work but there are plenty who can. As a Young attorney I spent alot of time in "Room A" (arraignments) of the county courthouse and I saw lines of those on PA charged with all sorts of crimes. If you are fit enough to rob a hot dog stand operator or jack some guy's car you are fit enough to do some manual labor

I would support that and have no problem with it it it were properly set up, managed and run well.
 
thats where the money is that is not going to basic needs of life.

So, you support the government taking all the desposable income from the private sector?
 
You want to know how additional hundreds of billions of dollars will help?

We can do several things with it that we are not now doing

1- we can use it to decrease the deficit

2- we can use it to rebuild some of our failing infrastructure or to fund the types of public service programs that Turtle just suggested and endorsed or other good things

3- we can use it for a combination of both
 
You want to know how additional hundreds of billions of dollars will help?

We can do several things with it that we are not now doing

1- we can use it to decrease the deficit

2- we can use it to rebuild some of our failing infrastructure or to fund the types of public service programs that Turtle just suggested and endorsed or other good things

3- we can use it for a combination of both

the only way to stop the deficit is to make the deficit a problem for the vast majority of the voters. right now it isn't and the dem scheme to raise ONLY the taxes of the top 2% SENDS A MESSAGE to the rest of the voters that DEFICIT reduction IS NOT THEIR DUTY NOR WILL THEY HAVE TO SUFFER tax increases to accomplish this

that means the deficit will continue to grow because the tax hikes on the "rich" won't come close to making up the spending the rest of the voters clamor for.

right now the dems buy votes this way. and the dems won't engage in serious spending cuts because that will impact their ability to buy votes with social spending.

the first thing we need is a flat tax. if everyone is faced with tax hikes (or benefit reductions) due to more government expansion, EVERYONE will have an incentive to stop such nonsense.

the second thing we need are judges who won't rubber stamp that many and expansive government programs that are not constitutionally proper

the third thing is we need to make dependence by those who are not disabled much less comfortable
 
Back
Top Bottom