Trickle Down is sound economics
Trickle Down is a fraud
Trickle Down kills USA jobs
Trickle Down makes USA jobs
Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
The Psychology of Persuasion
False premise. The rich are not richer. Does Mr. Buffett have more wealth today or a few years ago? Does Mr. Gates have more wealth today or a few years ago?
I understand what you are trying to do but it would help if you did your homework first then stated the question correctly.
But nice try
I came into this world fighting, screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I have no problem going out the same way.
“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes
Trickle Down has been downright disastrous:
I have quite a few links, here is one I read the other day:
We’re More Unequal Than You Think by Andrew Hacker | The New York Review of Books
"Another 2.6 million people slipped into poverty in the United States last year, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday, and the number of Americans living below the official poverty line, 46.2 million people, was the highest number in the 52 years the bureau has been publishing figures on it. "
"Since 1980, middle-class wages have largely stagnated and lower-class wages have declined, while the upper echelons of American society have seen a windfall. A study by University of California, Berkeley professor Emmanuel Saez found that, as of 2007, the top decile of American earners pulled in 49.7 percent of total wages, a level that's "higher than any other year since 1917.""
15 Facts About U.S. Income Inequality That Everyone Should Know (CHARTS)
Wages average an increase of .1% growth
"The income story in America is deeply troubling. Inflation-adjusted average hourly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers (a category that encompasses 80% of the workforce and leaves out higher-paid managers and supervisors) rose by an anemic 0.1% a year from 1979 to 2007, according to the EPI. A potent combination of economic and social forces has conspired to keep wages down for most workers with the exception of a brief period of white-hot economic growth in 1995-2000."
U.S. Wage Growth: The Downward Spiral - BusinessWeek
My blog, where I talk latest news on economics and some other issues.
Having said that, my belief is that debt in of itself is not a complete evil. Its in how it is spent which makes the difference. (along with amount). There was good and bad with Reaganomics. The intent was right, the direction was correct, the amount was too high. We shouldn't have gone as far into debt as we did. There was still way too many loose ends. Bush and Clinton were roughly keeping the same pace. Yes, for a few brief years we balanced the books, sorta. GW Bush comes along and has a whole new book thrown at him. Not that he read it correctly or interpreted it correctly. The longer his presidency went on, the worse the spending got, and the less relevance the debt had as to what it was being spent on. By the end, TARP was only putting us farther into debt without it helping anything at all. Hurting us more is what I believe personally.
Along comes Obama and continues the end of the Bush presidency, the one that the libs carry on about as to how and why Obama is facing such a daunting task of a wrecked ecomony. So, obviously, the answer to re righting the economy is not to add 4x the amount of what got us into trouble in the 1st place. Not only are we going 180 degrees in the wrong direction, we just hit the throttle to max in the process. Buying time from a collapse while making it 4x more difficult to get out of what will, if left without correction into true economic disaster is NOT saving the economy or the country.
The question is rather, what is trickle down economic? Trickle down economics is that tax breaks or better business environment while benefit the society as a whole.
However what it does not say is that these benefits outweigh the costs of reducing government spending or running deficits.
I don't think it is trickle down economics that has failed, but they have run under a false flag. To increase spending, reduce taxes for everyone, give handouts to certain companies, and raise taxes for others is not trickle down economics. It is populist crony capitalism.
My opinion is that trickle-down is not a fair basis for an economy to be successful. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with the rich trickling down but to achieve a more egalitarian society, trickle-up is far more important.
Naturally, there are some who will gain more than others. It's not wrong to be rich. However, when wealth is too concentrated, the consequences are negative. Returning to the Korean economic miracle, when these poor families began to buy appliances and cars, certainly the business owners became rich. This was the basis for the growth of the Korean manufacturing industry. Before that, there were a few rich politicians and bankers. They got even richer as they made and sold their products. So they could then employ more ordinary people.
What I see happening in America, is that wealth is gathering in the hands of very few, like, say, the politicians, bankers and their cohorts. Most of these people don't manufacture anything useful and don't contribute to our society. I have no objection to these few people getting more and more but I don't feel that we should prioritize giving them tax breaks or other special considerations.
I don't understand why they coin these catchall phrases like "trickle down' with negative connotations. In a capitalistic economy there's always going to be a cycle of money upwards then back down. There's nothing inherently wrong with that if the top doesn't use it's influence to prevent fair business practices. Which of course they never ever would do or at least get caught. Supposedly the masses are able to counter any kind of power peddling with sheer numbers.
Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."