• 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

He also tries to ingratiate himself with the dem leadership while pushing an agenda that would really rape those far less wealthy than he is but who are targeted as being "rich" by his dem allies

Maybe Buffet is part of the same machine that George Soros is trying to build? Maybe he will be his VP! Of course Buffet has also donated over 50% of his wealth more than once (I think 3 times at least with 93% of it donated it at one point) but hey, Buffet a guy that both the Republicans and Democrats wanted running on their team is trying to **** his fellow rich people over.
 
1. Buffet seems to personally be a good guy. Giving away his wealth a'la Carnegie is a classy move.
2. There is no theory of Trickle Down Economics; never has been. Buffet is playing a political card, not an economic one.
3. What is often derided as "trickle down economics" is the notion that there should be low, relatively flat tax rates for all income earners, and that lowering the tax rates on the wealthy causes them to become more productive. that theory is as true now as it was in the 1920's when i am first aware of it being the specific policy of an American Administration (under Sec Treasury Mellon). It worked for President Harding, it worked for President Coolidge, it worked for President Kennedy, it worked for President Reagan, it worked for President Clinton and it appears to have had some success under President Bush.
 
I've found the opposite.

What percentage of the unemployed and poor do you think remain unmotivated and "greedy" for the American taxdollars that they would wait until their 2 years of unemployment benefits or notification that their food stamps would be ending to actually go out and seek work?
 
None of us is greedy. It is only the other fellow who is greedy. Pursuing a single dollar worth of profits sets any individual up for accusations of greed.

Greed = rigging the system to benefit the few over the many.

You're young, idealistic, and Ayn Rand novels don't delve into the tax code, farm subsidies, and the history of company towns.

I recommend you balance your reading with some Upton Sinclair.
 
I've found that the wealthy are far less greedy than the poor at the end of the day.

You mean people who are struggling to maintain enough money to pay their rent are more concerned about it than someone who can go skiing in Switzerland for a week on a whim? Wow... I would never have reached that conclusion... To regular folks, greed is getting that new car without having to give up something substantial. To the wealthy, greed is firing thousands of people to artificially inflate stock prices enough to sell out and make a fortune.
 
How many poor people volunteer and give to charities?

I would suggest a large number do

Giving time to their church or donating to their church for one example

Others would be donating time to causes like the Seirra Club or Green peace.

The elderly I believe donate more of their time then any other demographic group
 
You mean people who are struggling to maintain enough money to pay their rent are more concerned about it than someone who can go skiing in Switzerland for a week on a whim? Wow... I would never have reached that conclusion... To regular folks, greed is getting that new car without having to give up something substantial. To the wealthy, greed is firing thousands of people to artificially inflate stock prices enough to sell out and make a fortune.

Are you really this naive? It does appear that you have been in D.C. too long and are out of touch with reality. Quite a few of those people struggling to maintain enough money to pay their rent have that problem because of their own actions, not the actions of the rich. there is plenty of room at the top for those willing to work hard, show discipline yet initiative, but that seems to be something you don't understand. Ever gone to a job fair, interviewed people, or actually hired someone? The entitlement mentality today promoted by liberalism destroys incentive and creates dependent poor people, thus liberals in power.
 
In 2001, Independent Sector, a nonprofit organization focused on charitable giving, found that households earning less than $25,000 a year gave away an average of 4.2 percent of their incomes; those with earnings of more than $75,000 gave away 2.7 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magazine/22FOB-wwln-t.html

several studies also found that REpublicans of a given economic level gave far more to both religious and secular charities than did similarly situated dem/liberals and liberals, when they gave, were far more likely to give to "think tanks" that don't help the poor but produce studies advocating more government redistribution
 
several studies also found that REpublicans of a given economic level gave far more to both religious and secular charities than did similarly situated dem/liberals and liberals, when they gave, were far more likely to give to "think tanks" that don't help the poor but produce studies advocating more government redistribution


You mean like the Bush library going up down the street here?
 
I would suggest a large number do

Giving time to their church or donating to their church for one example

Others would be donating time to causes like the Seirra Club or Green peace.

The elderly I believe donate more of their time then any other demographic group
Are we talking about poor people?
 
In 2001, Independent Sector, a nonprofit organization focused on charitable giving, found that households earning less than $25,000 a year gave away an average of 4.2 percent of their incomes; those with earnings of more than $75,000 gave away 2.7 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magazine/22FOB-wwln-t.html

http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/research/giving focused on meeting needs of the poor july 2007.pdf

Here is a real study that completely obliterates your premise; as would be expected. The rich have always given more than their expected share to charity.
 
http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/research/giving focused on meeting needs of the poor july 2007.pdf

Here is a real study that completely obliterates your premise; as would be expected. The rich have always given more than their expected share to charity.

we have seen alot of the libs on this site bash people with inherited money or marry into wealth. Yet many of the major charities and foundations are run by such people who can afford to work in often non paying jobs. After her marriage, my late mother had no paying jobs but she regularly put in 45-60 hour weeks running everything from women's clinics to the local theater.
 
So here is what I have learned.

Because I have been poor in the past I don't give to Smile Train.

I don't give to Salvation Army.

That because I was poor I'm a greedy bastard!

Tell me more American and turtledude tell me more about the poor people that you are so in tune with.

I'm not going to argue with you that rich people don't give money to charity but I mean, if they didn't wouldn't that just make them a ****ing asshole? Obviously you guys are high-power lawyers or something to be able to be so damn mad about getting your taxes taken away from big bad Obama. So how much are you giving away? Your link proves nothing it only says a few things. Basically:

-People making less donate to religion and helping people make ends meet (imagine that!)
compared to the richest which:
-Don't believe in God and donate more to cure cancer and donate money to schools so something could be named after them or little Billy can make sure he gets into that school he wanted.
 
Trickle-Down

trickle-down.jpg

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
 
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

as opposed to taxing our way to prosperity

maybe we should just let people work and succeed instead of the dems taking from those who work hard and smart to buy the votes of those who do not. under a proper system the government should not be in the business of deciding who wins or punishing those who do to buy the votes of those who do not
 
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

Do you ever think with the brain that God gave you? We have spent trillions on social programs and still have poverty, homeless, druggies, etc. so when do you ever come to the decision that failure to accept and handle personal responsibility is the problem not simply throwing money at the problem?
 
Back
Top Bottom