Why doesn't it work? Is it just a meme perpetuated by retards trying to take down capitalism?
It works. The more money the owners have, the more businesses open, the more job opportunities, the more employment, the more income there is.
The minute you cut this, you're cutting every company who's expenses rely on the rich. Think luxury such as yachts, cars, huge houses. All these engineers have their shit cut out.
Now, you're left with dindus who have 100000x less power than company owners running around with more money to spend in retarded and inefficient ways.
Right or wrong? Thoughts?
It obviously doesn't work. These are the lies the elite perpetuate to try to convince the working class that they'll be rich one day, and in the meantime, we should give tax breaks to the rich.
yeah, why should the majority on this planet enjoy their lives when the rich ppl don't have luxury cars and yachts,
It doesn't work. People are hired as a last resort. A major tested out the trickle down theory by enacting tax cuts to business owners and the state is in shambles
>>58395486
You don't get it, do you?
Who works for these luxury cars and yachts companies? Who provides the materials? Who works on these materials? Ghosts?
>trickle down economics
>capitalism
pick one
>>58394857
Nice strawman Canada
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpKvS7S1GY
>>58394857
It does work, just not to the extent that people imagine
Rich fucks will reinvest their money, so eventually Pablo gets to clean the bathrooms of the new $20 billion office building
70% of the American economy is consumers. Not fat cats. Not 'jerb cremators'. All the fat fucks gobble up the resources for cheap and pass you along farts, dust, and inflation
>>58395541
Is that why texas sucks?
>>58395828
what's the goal? we can't all be rich or the rich won't be rich anymore
so most of us are never getting anywhere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2llcneQEHM [Embed]
>>58395991
Why?
>>58396143
What strawman? The video you linked is a strawman itself on semantic bullcrap.
"THE WORD WAS NEVER USED, THEREFORE IT DOES NOT EXIST"
The concept is real, it's not because people didn't use these fancy words that it doesn't exist.
>>58396318
And who constructed that $20 billion office building? Who worked on the tools and the materials needed to build it?
It's a chain, it's not a magic trick where the building appears on its own.
>>58396837
because there is no need for office buildings unless there are rich ppl
communist never built office buildings
>>58397122
So there's less jobs.
All of those who were working on that building had an income for what they were doing.
All the materials that was supplied also provided an income to the guys who built it.
It's a chain. If there's no building to build, there's less jobs available.
even the republicans are saying trickle down failed
and their side benefits from it the most
>>58396837
>And who constructed that $20 billion office building? Who worked on the tools and the materials needed to build it?
Robots, illegals, and chinese industry workers.
Everyone who doubts for even a second that the lower classes are richer than now than in the past (especially before capitalism, lel) is not worth talking to.
Every loser on benefits has a fucking iPhone in the first world.
>>58397195
there are thousands of new cars parked in lots all over the planet that will never be sold because of the way the system works.
the system has failed
>>58397450
having an iphone isn't an indication of wealth
>>58395357
Seeing as the middle class is shrinking, due to the fact that they are MOVING UP into the upper class; it works just fine. Nothing gets done by people who sit on their asses and are fine with mediocrity. Rich people build things others want to buy, they pay people to work for them, and people who make the effort to provide serious value to others are rewarded with more money.
"But what about the POOR PEOPLE who stay poor?"
Are you going to force them to get a better job? Are you going to hold a gun to their head to do that? Some people are fine in low wage labor. Some are fine living on food stamps and working 12 hours a week. 70% of black children are born out of wedlock, and are on some form of government assistance. Mexican immigrants are on welfare at a rate 3x greater than any other demographic.
get rid of welfare, and you'll get rid of a lot of laziness and "low income" which is calculated by the IRS as money earned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u1J6EEhkyM&list=PLMNj_r5bccUyulYsatrzNGIvasrOeBy_Y&index=7
a waste of resources time and money
>>58397520
if you have any iphone as a luxury you can afford to feed and house yourself.
>>58397642
a waste of resources time and money
>>58397520
The fact that something like that is commonplace in the west is an indication of wealth.
>>58397520
oh hell yes it is, it's not proof of wealth but its an expensive phone and poor people should know better than to get one for status
>>58397520
No, but it is an indication that THANKS TO CAPITALISM, high grade tech which enhances the quality of life for humans, is now easily accessible to even the impoverished. A/C was something for only the wealthy in the 50s and 60s for example.
>>58397386
Who built the robots?
So now the issue is to regulate illegals, and not that economy itself.
Chinese industry workers? Reduce the taxes on the coorporations and keep the industry local. Problem solved.
+ Let me make it even harder for you.
More robots => less employees in the factory, right?
Therefore, what do we need? MORE FACTORIES to make up for the loss in employees. Who pays for these factories? THE RICH. The less money they have, they less they can open factories. The less jobs there are.
>>58397708
>canadian commie
Come over here you little shit, and I will show you how socialism works.
How it destroys nations.
How it kills the spirit.
When the head of the company gets more money, there's more to invest back into the company. Since these investments are generally under the pretext of "streamlining" it generally just cuts out the middleman and reduces jobs.
>>58397716
see that part of the problem, now you're gonna have to tell ppl how to live and not to expect much
we are not all here to see that your ideology succeeds
>>58397708
snopes says your car thing is wrong, and also explains how and why that never actually happens without the business crashing and burning, because people are paid very well to calculate the costs and market demands, so that resources don't get wasted.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/automobiles/unsoldcars.asp
>>58395828
Who builds middle class houses? Cars that don't cost hundreds of thousands? The same people. In fact, poorer people spend more of their disposable income.
It's true that the money of the rich "trickles down" when they invest in startups and buy mansions, and I don't think anyone is against rich people being rich. But people at the top are so filthy rich that it's actually unnecessary for their function in the economy. All the benefits you give are real, but people don't need that much money to fulfill that role in the economy.
>>58397850
lol yeah because poland is such a bastion of freedom and wealth
>>58397921
aren't you the one telling people how to live, by forcing them into a socialist society, where they aren't allowed to freely trade things of value at rates and quantities which they deem suitable for their own needs and wants?
>>58397450
>Everyone who doubts for even a second that the lower classes are richer than now than in the past (especially before capitalism, lel) is not worth talking to.
The middle class is on average poorer with a few gaining upperclass and the vast majority falling into your poor with a 2 year old smartphone category.
It doesn't work. One rich guy builds only one or two olympic sized pools vs 100 middle class being able to buy just an aboveground pool and you start to see trickle down is weaker for the economy.
>>58394857
It doesn't work primarily because of outsourcing. Richfaggots send whatever jobs they can overseas so that they can save some money by hiring chinks that work for pennies. So they keep getting richer, and the chinks get a couple of dimes an hour, and we get nothing.
>>58398128
clearly we should be working for cheaper than the chinks then so we can be rich...
>>58398002
They don't need that much, ok.
But do you expect people to be at $0? Are you claiming that there's unused money? I'm not sure what you're getting at.
They have more money, therefore they can afford more luxurious and expensive money. It's proportional their income. The same can be said about the middle class who spends $5 on that morning coffee when they can easily make it at home.
>>58394857
It's a strawman argument. Leftards don't understand actual economics.
>>58398025
You've just proven my point.
While trying to be ironic.
wew nice move senpai
>>58394857
>Why doesn't it work? I
Because it isn't a thing it is a strawman and the term itself was coined by a comedian.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/367682/trickle-down-lie-thomas-sowell
>>58398128
Reduce the taxes on the corporations and keep the production local? Problem solved.
>>58394857
>right
>wrong
subjective, always
>>58394857
It dosen't work. The super rich are more inclined to hold onto the money rather then spend it.
>>58398343
No.
I'm actually asking if it works or not, not if people want it or not.
>>58394857
>Why doesn't it work?
It does. Free markets work, people try to deny it but on some level of awareness everybody knows that capitalism works.
>>58398128
Daily reminder that sweat shops of which you're describing on average pay 5-7 times the local average wages in the nation's they are located in.
>>58394857
Trickle down is nonsense.
>get ready for QE4!
>are NIRPs the new ZIRP?
oh
>>58394857
It doesnt work. However trickle down/= capitalism
>>58394857
What if I have the money and don't open new bussinesses
>>58397993
did you read it? 2015 we now have a full recovery?
>>58398473
all we have to do is remove the minimum and you too can have all the comforts and security of those guys
>>58394857
>Trickle down economics
>Real theory
Find me someone, anyone of economic merit, who advocates this theory.
Protip: You can't
>>58398432
Pretty much this. Americans have it so good they have turned to tumblr to cry about how they were triggerd when they read something benign on their iPhone.
>>58398574
This. It was a liberal talking point to trash Republikeks
>>58397724
BEST POST IN THE THREAD.
trickle down is killed by outsourcing
>>58397724
>he supports tariffs
fuck off commie
>>58398241
Don't see why we need to reduce taxes. Simply force them to keep the production local. Before globalization was a thing companies were doing just fine.
>>58398476
5-7 times fuck-all is still fuck-all.
A lot of discussion on this topic TO THIS DAY, as evident by this thread, is still related to the theoretical aspect of this. "Theoretically, the rich will hire more", "Theoretically, unemployment will rise".
The truth is, the system doesn't work because by the time the money lags through the economy, inflation will have already set in, and the money supply will have already increased and diluted the supposed stimulus ten times over already.
So the people who get that money first, aka the banks, benefit, that's for sure. The rest, not so much.
>trickle down is now liberal
i love the amount of revisionism /pol/ comes up with
Hey faggot
If the rich are not getting richer when they invest, why would they invest?
Like: A rich guy could start a factory. He compares the money he will have if he doesn't start the factory with the money he will have if he does.
If the money if he starts the factory is smaller or the same as if he doesn't start the factory, then the factory isn't getting started.
>>58394857
>The more money the owners have, the more businesses open, the more job opportunities,
once they've reached a certain point in market saturation it becomes unprofitable to own and maintain branches of that businesses.
Do you think anyone would open up 2 wal-marts 1 KM away from eachother just because they can?
>>58398685
>5-7 times fuck-all is still fuck-all
Compared to what?
>>58394857
people keep thinking actual money trickles down but they ignore all the technology that has trickled down.
liberal faggots will gladly spout this bullshit while posting it from their iphones.
>>58398753
>Do you think anyone would open up 2 wal-marts 1 KM away from eachother just because they can?
come to murrica and check out starbucks friendo
ITT
>>58398183
But you're wrong. There is "unused" money, mostly speculating or sitting for interests and the richer your get, the more you have. Poor and middle class, by spending most of what they have are much more interesting for the economy.
To be clear, for the same amount of money, if you have 90% of it own by 10% (like now) or if you have it equally own by everyone, the consumption will be much stronger in the equal situation (just less flashy, much more normal cars, less yatchs) meaning more jobs.
Abolishing H1B and fining/jailing people who offshore jobs would go a long way in improving the economic situation for most americans.
>>58394857
Trickle down economics is a literal fucking joke from the 30s (related to the great depression) which libtards are using to strawman anyone who doesn't support taxing rich people 100% and giving all the money to niggers.
It's a left wing fantasy:
http://youtu.be/U3BOg4U1R_I
>>58394857
The rich need incentive to spend their money in their own country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NA8mBCl7Y2U
>>58398760
>>58398685
Let me expand
How arrogant are you to say that these people who are making 5-7 times what the average person in their nation are are not doing so out of their own accord?
The average wage in America is 26k
6 times that is 156k
You're quite the arrogant fuck to look at what we have and worked for and our predecessors worked through what the third world is going through now and to say "no you don't actually want to do this".
If they did t have these comparatively well paying jobs they would be prostitutes garbage scavengers or sustenance farmers all of which are much worse jobs that don't pay nearly as much and require much more of their time.
>>58398574
tfw it actually makes sense but it's actually good and not bad
Btw, it's a simple concept. I don't need anyone of stature to advocate this theory for me to know whether it makes sense or not. Deconstruct it, analyze it, find its flaws, then discuss it. Lol at appeal to authority.
>>58397122
I hope that last sentence is a troll.
>>58399067
>>58399067
he's right.
commies never built office buildings.
they built concrete squares stacked on top of each other that barely functioned in any way.
>>58397450
The average citizen of the USSR was better off in 1955 than in 1915. Living standards change in a lot of systems.
It works for the Ruling Class in the DC Metroplex
>>58394857
It only works when there are lots of business opportunities to invest in and a lack of liquidity. In that case giving more money to the investor class helps funds more businesses and create more jobs and mor GDP. However it won't work in all cases.
Trickle Down Economics is a left wing pejorative. Some conservative economists espouse supply side economic views. The general belief is that lower taxes and barriers create supply side shocks and drive down prices, thereby spurring increased economic activity and growth, as well as a greater need for workers due to the increased output of firms.
>>58398861
So let me get this straight.
You're telling me that with LESS money, they'll INVEST more?
Also, think about it..
Less flashy cars + less yatchs = less jobs because of less production.
>>58398933
I'm here to turn it against them and tell them how great of a theory it actually is.
>>58397700
A lot of poor people keep phones given as presents a long time ago. They could still have difficulties with day to day expenses.
>>58399054
Why deconstruct, analyze and find the flaws of a straw man. You generally don't make a straw man that isn't obviously flawed.
What the fuck does trickle down economics even mean to the average commie? Does it mean give moar money to the rich so that they can pay the plebs to work for them? Is that it? It doesn't mean anything. It's a straw man made up by people who quite literally worship the political elite. Eg the government.
>>58397744
Quality of life is also affected by relative wealth and class dynamics.
By Western standards, the Inuit were very poor. However, due to lack of class tension combined with strong family and community ties, the Inuit considered themselves very happy.
>>58394857
It doesn't work because of inflation.
You add money to the top.
That money is just as valuable as all the other money.
So the people at the top use it to acquire assets.
That causes the money to trickle down to the next level.
But by the time those people get the money, so many people have the new money that the new and old money lose value.
So they're left with more money but last capacity to purchase anything.
Effectively leaving them where they were before.
Meanwhile the people at the top who got the use the money before the currency was debased are sitting pretty with their new shit.
S
>>58399350
He's saying that many people with a little more money each would spend more because they spend it on every day living epenses.
Less flashy cars and yachts is countered by many more people buying average cars.
>>58399386
I must be getting something wrong because it makes perfect sense to me.
Elite = more money
Elite = possess the power the open jobs
More money = more business
More business = more jobs
Give the power to those who have it and it will come back to the people because they need the people to get more power.
Where's the "strawman"? It's a theory in itself.
>>58397834
Nice strawman
>>58397850
Try telling that to most older Russians.
>>58399618
What strawman?
>>58398096
>what is market socialism
>what is anarchist socialism
>what is libertarian socialism
>>58398188
>muh libruls don't understand my personal, specific, objective brand of economics
>>58399588
Ok I get it.
Basically, by the time the money trickles down, the prices of product have already gone up.
It's like a guy in 2000 receiving his paycheck from 1950. Right?
So the only issue with that theory is the time, right?
>>58397921
I own a 16 euro shit phone despite being able to buy much MUCH MUCH better
saves money for you know, feeding myself
>>58399660
I'm sure that being an American, you totally know lots of middle age+ Russians.
>>58398476
6 times 1.25 is 7.5. Not much.
Also, source?
>>58394857
So the proportion of the lower classes shrink and the higher classes swell as people are lifted out of poverty??
> SOUNDSGOODTOMEM8.jpg
>>58399875
I guess you could sum it up that way.
The issue is that trickle down economics always starts with adding New Money.
Printing more money will always mean more inflation.
You could do the same thing by giving all the new money to the people at the bottom, but very quickly the same thing will occur, the market will adjust values for the new money supply and all existing currency will be debased.
>>58398798
>financed and crucially supported by government funded science and universities
>>58399938
so? you're just moralizing.
if people were smart like you they wouldn't be poor
>>58396695
lmao we can't all be rich though faggot
you're either some rich and some poor with most in the middle,
all poor with few few rich elite
or all poor
your pick faggot
>>58400125
Why not just cut taxes on corporations to keep them local?
>>58399041
The funny thing is that there are still millions there trapped by unemployment as garbage heap scavengers and prostitutes. Also factory workers in China, Indonesia, etc get fired if they lose a limb at work. It happens often.
it works in some industries and not in others. Thats the problem with macro economic theory is its like trying to carve an ice sculpture with a bat.
There are situations where reducing regulations is a bad thing, and situations where natural monopoly should exist.
>>58399153
Those are office buildings in many cases. Also they weren't at all that dysfunctional. That's just an American canard.
>>58399350
>You're telling me that with LESS money, they'll INVEST more?
Investing is a meme. A billionare won't open any more shops than a millionare because the demand isn't there.
>>58400359
yeah, im gonna let the brainwashed tell me what all the options are
>>58400194
>google is a university
>amazon is a university
>microsoft is a university
>ibm is a university
>apple is a university
>spacex is a university
fuck off retard.
>>58399941
Actually I know quite a few.
>>58394857
>Why doesn't it work?
The theory assumes that the people at the top will spend most of what they "earn", but there is only so much stuff one family can buy. If I get $10,000 more every year, I won't buy more milk, gas, soap, toothpaste, or anything else. Maybe some things, but only to a point.
Less people buying stuff creates a smaller market and causes businesses to fail and lay people off. It's an economic death spiral.
>>58400577
The research is often provided partially by universities. Also, government subsidies.
Catastrophic accumulation of wealth at the top. People often forget that wealth doesn't grow in a linear fashion, but cumulatively.
This creates a very unstable system, where all the wealth is centralized in less and less individuals, which increases the damage to the economy when one of them goes bust. Therefore, trickle down economics is almost synonymous with booms and busts
>>58400365
Honestly,
This is gonna sound retarded and you're going to wonder why the hell it works this way, but this is the way it works.
Whenever they offer to cut corporate taxes to hold industry, industry bitches that "that won't do, it's still too expensive to be here"
So the options are more tax cuts, or piss off industry.
After a point you can't push for more tax cuts because people don't like to pay more in personal income tax than corporations pay in corporate tax.
So industry gets pissed, despite sitting on mountains of money.
So to go make more mountains of money, industry pushes itself outward, to places with less expensive regulations or cheaper labor, or both.
So the only choice to hold industry in place is to raise tariffs to offset the outsourced areas cheap-ness.
Then industry gets pissed again "that's not fair, you're hurting world commerce"
So tariffs get lowered again, but industry doesn't bounce back.
So everyone who's not industry loses out.
We're actually currently in the latter phase of this where industry is bitching about tariffs
That's why the want the TPP because it's the indsutry's way out of tariff, and therefore more profit.
>>58397619
>The rising share of adults in the lower- and upper-income tiers is at the farthest points of the income distribution, distant from the vicinity of the middle. The share of American adults in the lowest-income tier rose from 16% in 1971 to 20% in 2015. Over the same period, the share of American adults in lower-middle income households did not change, holding at 9%.
>Upper-income families more than doubled their wealth from 1983 to 2007 as it climbed from $323,402 to $729,980. Despite losses during the recession, these families recovered somewhat since 2010 and had a median wealth of $650,074 in 2013, about double their wealth in 1983.
>The biggest winners since 1971 are people 65 and older. Not coincidentally, the poverty rate among people 65 and older fell from 24.6% in 1970 to 10% in 2014.13 Evidence shows that rising Social Security benefits have played a key role in improving the economic status of older adults.14 The youngest adults, ages 18 to 29, are among the notable losers with a significant rise in their share in the lower-income tiers.
no, the middle class didn't shift from middle to rich. one of the biggest gains into the "rich" sector was caused by the elderly. Baby boomers be retiring. A lot of the took out retirements sightly early when the economy took a shit.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/
what's going to be really interesting is seeing how much the growth to poor picks up once the baby boomers stop booming.
>The economic status of adults with a bachelor’s degree changed little from 1971 to 2015, meaning that similar shares of these adults were lower-, middle- or upper-income in those two years.
people with BS degrees are starting to stagnate in their income, much like the middle class started to in the 80's. Soon income will be going down. BS degrees are truly the new HS diploma.
>>58394857
Trickle-down *does* work, but under specific circumstances, none of which really apply to modern industrial societies.
What "trickle-down" economics really is is a freeing up or diverting of capital from one area of the economy to businesses. The idea is that businesses are being constrained by a lack of capital, and with better access to it, companies will invest to capture demand that would have otherwise been lost.
>The good
This is objectively what happens when the following is true:
1) Businesses don't have enough capital to meet their investment needs.
2) There is demand that is not being met due to a lack of supply.
3) There is a means to efficiently divert capital from one economic area to another.
4) There is sufficient credit to supply the necessary deficit spending to maintain this scheme.
>The bad
1) Western businesses are inundated with capital.
2) Demand that isn't being met is not due to a lack of supply.
3) The mechanisms by which Western societies divert capital from one economic area to another (which is to say, the political structure) is all fucked up.
>The ugly
Trickle-down policies have been in place in the US and China for far too long. Trickle-down policies have also been in place in France and Germany for far too long, except the money was diverted from households to the state, instead of households to businesses as in the US and China.
The US and EU countries don't really have a problem paying their bills, regardless of whether /pol/ thinks this is true. China, on the other hand, is running up against what the market will accept for their debt, and it may well shatter China and move the world to a new recession.
>>58400125
No. Supply side economics is you deregulate and then cut the money supply to control inflation.
The main problem is reagan was retarded and actually increased the spending of the government significantly during this period of deregulation and lower taxes so the interest on the debt increased tremendously as a % of the deficit so people after reagan HAD to increase the money supply to pay for it.
we all know how this works out. every time
That pic is BS and everyone knows.
When rich people buy yachts, who builds them? Who sells them? Same for when they buy cars and homes. It's just now that liberals have banned manufacturing jobs in the US with excessive regulations and costs (forced healthcare, high min wage, pensions) now all that work is done in europe or asia. So it doesn't "trickle" down to you because you fucked us and yourself with your entitlements.
If anything liberalism is TRICKLE UP POVERTY. You take away jobs and chances at prosperity, now more than half of Americans are on some form of gov assistance (welfare, SS, disability, unemployment, etc etc).
>>58394857
>liberals proving the rich can increase the size of their cup (or slice or wtvr the analogy)
>liberals disproving their own theory of a finite amount of wine (or pizza or pie, etc....)
GG liberals
My thoughts on it are that more businesses need to be around for competition.
It is much better for the worker if the businesses don't have to take a large chunk of the profits to give to people who live their entire lives off of welfare.
People living their entire lives not working, but taking money from the government hurt the economy horribly.
This doesn't apply to people who come into some bad luck those kind of people don't need more than five years to get back on their feet.
A major problem with capitalism is with advancements in technology a lot of jobs aren't needed anymore causing the job market to not have much competition.
I think this was something the government tried to fix by letting everyone into college, but it failed horribly with an insane amount of loans to people taking shit courses and colleges raised tuition costs to eat up all the grants.
Captialism from what I've seen relies on two main things.
Value and growth.
If a business or worker doesn't have value it will die. If it doesn't have growth then it will die to other businesses or workers who do grow.
I still think it works better than communism, because all governments are at least a little bit corrupt. With communism those corrupt government officials hold all the power.
>>58400785
wow that decrease in the associate degrees. and bachelors halting? shit bachelors are truly the new high school degree.
fucken shit.
>>58397716
>>58397715
>>58397744
Are you guys retarded? Everyone has smart phones nowadays. Fucking Africans have them, and they live in mud huts. They're so inexpensive to make that there are programs to just give them smartphones and build a charging station.
Seriously, go look it up. Smartphones aren't a sign of being rich. Everyone needs at least some way to access the internet in the modern world, or it's impossible to find or get a job. Smartphones aren't a luxury anymore, they're a necessity, unless you want to work in the same low paying jobs that Pedro is, only to be undercut by Juan and lose even that.
>>58400785
wtf a high school graduate had their income decreased more than a high school dropout????
>>58400586
The only middle aged Russians left are the ones who agreed with Stalinism. People who disagreed with Stalinism were killed.
Trickle down economics is a boogeyman invented by leftists
No economist in history has ever suggested such an idea
The similar, actual economic idea is called supply-side economics and demonstrably works
>>58394857
>le slice of pie meme
There is no pie.
>>58394857
Trickle-down isn't about money magically spreading its way down society it's about allowing free movement of capital and investment and creating more jobs and value for the economy.
>>58400677
>wealth doesn't grow in a linear fashion, but cumulatively
This is the kind of deceptive wording everyone here needs to watch out for, this phrase actually makes no sense since linear and cumulative are not comparable adjectives.
>>58400899
How many people are going to buy a yacht, and how often? You don't understand basic economics.
>>58400649
Google was founded by chucklefucks maxing out credit cards on a server farm that managed to hit it big and create a technology empire.
It had fuck all to do with universities and government subsidies.
Entrepreneurship works when the government gets the fuck out of the way and lets people use their brain to create shit for wealth generation.
>>58400839
>Trickle-down *does* work
It doesn't...ever. You don't know what you're talking about.
>>58394857
>The best investment a corporation can make is lobbying
>pay more complying with regulations than in taxes
>artificially low interest rates
>deficit spending and inflationary policy
>government using up resources
>income tax
The gov simply squanders business. Cutting upper level income tax does little, as does cutting corporate tax rate when our corporate tax rate is still comparatively high to other countries. We don't need welfare and its moral hazard, so we shouldn't have this huge government destroying capital
>>58400649
nice try shekelstein.
universities are fine however, but most progress comes from top companies putting down a lot of money for research.
I'm not great with economics, but why don't we give big tax breaks to companies that are willing to keep their production within the US to create more jobs?
It'd have to rival the savings of outsourcing for people to do it, but it seems like it'd help create jobs while minimizing profit loss on the corporation's part
>>58401683
bullshit most of the research is done with public money
computers, internet, drugs, farming, ect ect
I put this visual aid together. Should help with the naysayers.
Its not that "trickle-down" doesn't work, you just don't understand it
Trickle-down economics is not, "give lots of money to the rich, it will somehow spread to the poor", it is "stop over-taxing the rich, because the rich are employers and investors".
People are being pushed from the middle class toward the extremes of wealth and poverty because governments are not just letting the rich completely evade taxes that hit the middle class hard, but using public money to prop up investments and using regulations to give large companies greater competitive advantage.
Take, for instance, the bank bail-outs. They gambled big, and lost, but governments didn't let them suffer the consequences. Instead, they took the loss themselves, heaping the burden incurred by the rich onto the taxpayer. Public risk, private profit.
This is not "trickle-down economics" at all! This is direct, forcible transfer of wealth from the middle-class to the very rich, and it was done by the left more than the right.
>>58398682
If it wasn't for tariffs, there wouldn't be any manga images for you to post, weebo.
Japan levied massive tariffs to keep their weak economy afloat after WW2. Tariffs saved their industry in an event from the 60's to the 80's which is referred to as the Japanese post-war economic miracle.
>>58401830
probably not worth it any more when you can use ppl they will do the same job for a few dollars a day
we gave them tax brakes for 30 years and they said they would provide jobs. they lied
>>58401187
The US in the 1880s, Brazil in the 1970s, Japan in the 1980s, China in the 1990s all disagree with you. There are other factors which make it undesirable, especially for an advanced set of economies like the West, but to say that it doesn't work, under any circumstances, ever? Patent nonsense.
>>58402107
>>58402096
Good work Canada
>>58394857
Capitalism has fallen to monetarism and corrupted criminalized markets where only a few decades ago things illegal based upon THEFT as their actual mode of operation, have become legalized, thus ruining trickling down, and implementing robbing up.
In this endless escapade of newly legalized crime, the tiny lowlife however can also benefit, just not at the level of the giant criminals.
The problem is production is not needed for profit, better efficiency is not needed, care for an industry invested is not needed, and often paper swapping with no relation to the real economy is the biggest, riichest, most profitable game.
It's not capitalism, it's government crony criminality and corrupt laws.
>>58402107
The left is so deep in their redistributionist mindset that they can't distinguish between letting people keep their earnings or profits of wise investment and straight-up handing tax money to the rich.
>>58402096
This one is more accurate
>trickle down economics
>how we're told it works
except no one advocates trickle down economics because it's a buzzword created by critics tax cuts. I imagine you mean supply side economics which is a macroeconomic theory that evolved out of keynesian theory as a hands off alternative. Instead of spurring economic growth with government spending they push for lowering the barriers of production and lowering taxes to increase investing in capital.
In theory it works pretty well in certain circumstances and worked very well in the USA and UK during the 80's and 90's. The current problems of inequality stem from the decreasing value of labor due to technology and increased labor competition due to globalization/immigration, this hurts wages and cuts most people out of investing which is where real wealth creation comes from under supply side economics.
There is a much larger incentive to reinvest in yourself through financial markets opposed to physical things.
Trickle down is a joke. It requires the same naivete to believe it works as it does for people who think communism works. People are assholes. I'm sorry you haven't figured that out yet.
>>58394857
>have a perfect system that worked for literally 1000 years (monarchy)
>change it for jew shit (capitalism, republic)
>send some fags at the new world
>they know nothing else
>urrr durr why we so poor? why capitalism no work? Israel best friend
>>58402838
Thank you BR, I've been looking for this Ben Garrison original
>>58402480
ty Merica
>>58394857
The middle class is dying on a global scale and white people have low fertility as a result.
Make of it what you will.
>>58403117
Your country name is literally my last name.
personally i think trickle down economics works ... the problem is it has been hijacked by wall street wich leeches off every resource on the planet building massive derivatives so that all the capital has to go trough them first hand ..
It's like they are sucking off 1 drop of wine everytime 3 droplets of wine trickle down .. obviously it still works but come a time when the greedy fuck syphoned so much wine out of the bottle that there is not even enough wine to fill the rich's cup.
Even Reagan said Reaganomics should only be implemented temporarily, now we're just going farther and farther down an unsustainable economic model and it's going to collapse very soon.
>>58394857
It doesn't work because the rich hoards money.
No system works when people hoard.this much currency with no plans on spending it.
>>58398432
free markets are awesome. but this isn't free markets. this is the gov't picking favorites in the market, which fucks things up.
>>58403812
and why are they not spending it ? isn't it because the government has no incentive other than to majorly break business's back with hundreds and hundreds of legislative measure aimed at keeping a few at the top ?
Do you really think the gov't write laws to protect you or are they really protecting their friends.
>>58403812
And the horde it in order to have power over others who've horded less.
They only spend it to buy out competition and shit, and make all that money back while the person they paid is already upper class and will try to do the same at a later point.
It never moves.
>>58394857
>Implying it works at all
Look at the growing disparity between the richest 1% in America and the general population of America. They only grow wealthier and wealthier while everyone else in the country stagnates.
Trickle down economics doesn't work for the same reason that communism doesn't work. The people with power will ensure that they keep their power no matter what.
>>58403812
Wait, what? I'm not saying the government could or should do anything about it, all I'm saying is that the megagigarich should spend their money on more shit, buy even bigger yatchs, damn it!
>>58394857
Not really. Generally these owners end up buying more land and then charging business owners rent. There's a jew around where I live who owns a shit ton of properties and he's just one of many. Sure he gives jobs, but he gets much more than he gives. So that picture is wrong only in that the glass which gets bigger doesn't spill a bit to the ones under.
>>58394857
That's crony capitalism
>>58394857
>NEETs posting on FB, twitter, other forums
>using mac books
>eating take aways
>owning more technology than was though imaginable at a University, let alone in your pocket, even 20 years ago
>it never trickles down to me fuck the 1%
>working harder/longer/smarter doesn't mean you deserve more than me while I watch anime and fap to loli
>Bernie/Corbyn 2K16
Literally every fucking Dem/Labour voter in the world
>>58398682
>Hurr i never took internat'l econ durrr
>>58404436
No one gives a shit about trinkets brit tard. This is about land. How much does your land lord charge you and how many properties does he own?
>>58404197
Hmm, what did Hitler do to make Germany wealthy again?
who /keynesianmasterrace/ here?
>>58394857
The book Capital in the 21st Century By Thomas Picketty literally debunks trickle down for 1000 pages.
Adam Smith had also been debunked by David Graeber in his book Debt:The First 5000 years. A history of money (debt)
>>58394857
It's wrong because of globalized economies. The rich don't spend their money where it reaches down to the people. They use it in other countries, or hoard it tax havens or swiss banks. Trickle down is without a doubt a lie in our current economic model.
However, if we were to impose tariffs and other such restrictions to make it more expensive for things to be imported to the U.S, we already have the means of manufacturing to keep our own economy thrive. In short, the most rich take money out of the American economy, or really most economies. It's like mercantilism+, instead of colonies, the world
>>58404436
>posting on FB, twitter, other forums
>using mac books
>eating take aways
>owning more technology than was though imaginable at a University, let alone in your pocket, even 20 years ago
So if you have the means to eat and talk, you're not in a bad situation?
>home ownership a distant dream
>healthcare costs exploding
>college costs more than people used to spend on a house
>with a college degree, you can't earn as much as people did a few decades ago without one
>without a college degree, good luck flipping those burgers
>not allowed through college without agreeing with genuinely insane ideas
>the economy has turned from a largely cooperative endeavor to achieve ever greater comfort together to a competitive arena where you either get rich or get ground into the dirt
Even the nice parts of the world have become a crazy fucked place to try and live.
>>58405505
>Bring in millions of immigrants because you're too good for labor
>Woooooww why is everything so expensive???
punks indicating that the wealthy build businesses non-stop
They don't....most of them build A business,
they can only eat so many steaks and buy so many yachts...depending on the scrapes of the wealthy is a joke
>most of their money is hidden and off-shore
>>58405618
>Bring in millions of immigrants because you're too good for labor
That's not why millions of immigrants were brought in. Working-class people are not pro-immigration.
>>58394857
The modern banking system is the definition of trickle down, its not like the federal reserve gives everyone in a America $1000 if they want to spend $3bn in QE or whatever bailout method they choose to correct the economy.
>>58394857
it only works when your nation is unquestionably dominant in global trade, like in the 1950's.
"trickle down" was a re-tread from a different era, and it did not help that it was marketed at the beginning of the most prolonged industrial decline in U.S. history
The "trickle down economics" argument, made by leftists, is open to a couple of questions.
Firstly, what is the bottle of wine representing? Presumably, it would represent society / the people's money, being poured into the top glass / big banks / big corps. This interpretation is ENTIRELY wrong, as the bottle of wine is actually the "well-being" of the market, often seen as economic growth. It's a common misconception, that the bottle somehow represent anything but the the top glass's own ability to fill itself with wine.
Secondly, what do the wine glasses represent? Presumably, again, it represents the wealth classes, poorest in the bottom, wealthiest at the top. This interpretation is not wrong, but I'm 100% sure leftists only see it from a national perspective. The well-being of the market not only affects the nation's people, but also foreign countries. Some wine may be directed towards foreign investments, such at those made in China. This yields the perception that the wine is not filling up adequately from the national perspective, because they are ignoring the beneficial effects of cheap foreign labor has on the poor in a given first world country, and also how much these investments fill foreign glasses, on a relative scale. From a nationalistic point of view, trickle down economics will have a failed; but in the grand scheme of things, it's working perfectly as intended.
It's only when applying this trickle down argument to quantitative easing, that I find it to be somehow accurate, as currency accumulates at the starting point of a QE, and even turns into nothing but inflation when it reaches the poorest. In this sense, the image of the failing trickle down economics is fairly accurate.
The "trickle down economics" argument, made by leftists, is open to a couple of questions.
Firstly, what is the bottle of wine representing? Presumably, it would represent society / the people's money, being poured into the top glass / big banks / big corps. This interpretation is ENTIRELY wrong, as the bottle of wine is actually the "well-being" of the market, often seen as economic growth. It's a common misconception, that the bottle somehow represent anything but the the top glass's own ability to fill itself with wine.
Secondly, what do the wine glasses represent? Presumably, again, it represents the wealth classes, poorest in the bottom, wealthiest at the top. This interpretation is not wrong, but I'm 100% sure leftists only see it from a national perspective. The well-being of the market not only affects the nation's people, but also foreign countries. Some wine may be directed towards foreign investments, such at those made in China. This yields the perception that the wine is not filling up adequately from the national perspective, because they are ignoring the beneficial effects of cheap foreign labor has on the poor in a given first world country, and also how much these investments fill foreign glasses, on a relative scale. From a nationalistic point of view, trickle down economics will have a failed; but in the grand scheme of things, it's working perfectly as intended.
It's only when applying this trickle down argument to quantitative easing, that I find it to be somehow accurate, as currency accumulates at the starting point of a QE, and even turns into nothing but inflation when it reaches the poorest. In this sense, the image of the failing trickle down economics is fairly accurate.
>>58408880
>>58408499
Holt shit, 4chan is acting weird on my end.
>>58395828
the difference in spending for a 200 million worth person and a 1 billion or 5 billion worth is negligible. Rich Businesses don't start whole new companies either. They just kind of hedge themselves, and invest in the market, bouilloning stocks, not creating jobs or more worth for anyone but themselves. Op, it doesn't world becuase of gobilisim. Even when they do spend, it is all overseas and is swallowed into a black hole of third world. Now in theory those countries should become buyers and help us, but the rest of the world is so huge, those gains won't be seen for 200 years. Now if they had to build everything here, and spend all money here, it would be a little different, if limited immigration.
Take Detroit. A free market economy theory would say as those houses/shops come down in price, businesses should move in and buy them up because cheap. Your basic self correcting market. But did that happen? no. So there is more at work than just capitol markets in the world. Like culture.
>>58410036
>the difference in spending for a 200 million worth person and a 1 billion or 5 billion worth is negligible.
You might think so, but there are some very expensive luxuries. People pay $200 million just for a house, just to buy it, and then they've got to maintain it and pay property taxes.
A person with $200 million isn't going to buy a $200 million house. A person with $5 billion might buy 3 of them for when he travels.
There are cars that cost more than a million dollars. Some people collect them, in the cavernous garages of their $200 million houses. Same with dresses and jewelry.
Look at something like Blue Origin, the rocket company Jeff Bezos started with his Amazon money. Is that a serious business, or just a very expensive hobby? A lot of businesses are, "because I want to", not because they make money. You see this with farms and vinyards. Rich people love to own money-losing farms. They like to just go look at it and say, "I own that."
On top of that are the families, gifts, trust-funds, and bail-outs. The bigger the fortune, the wider you can spread it, without doing serious damage to the balance.
Hundred-millionaires spend themselves into poverty trying to keep up with billionaires they know. It happens. There's no amount of money that lets you spend as much as you want all the time. It might seem hard to believe, but even billionaires feel the pinch.
always weird to watch sheep that get fucked by the system themselves defending it.
explains why ppl thing the right are a bunch of morons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok
Daily reminder that free-market capitalists are by definition literal keks.
>>58394857
Ok, time for a Railroad Tycoon story
>be me
>be in college
>roommate has a computer game
>railroad tycoon II platinum edition
>ok let's play it I say
>game starts out slow
>each build railroads connecting cities
>both start making money
>build more rails
>buy more trains
>even more money
>life is good
>many game years go by
>towns growing
>still close game moneywise
>roommate uses stocks to get a little ahead
>i dont know how this works
>roommate buys business my trains go to
>makes money off my money
>this bullshit can't end well
>roommate doubles my money in one game year
>buys my rail lines
>cant afford interest on bank loans taken to buy business back
>roommate making exponential profit on interest alone
>now in debt -$1,500,000
>roommate has $398,562,000,000
>no point to continue
>start new game
>always same outcome
>would play again
pic related
>>58395828
Robots, a handful of designers and minimum wage workers. China provides the materials. A maximum of like 1000 people per production facility making an entire product line.
You do not get it, we don't produce the raw materials, we don't produce the goods, we work as service people and salesmen for foreign owned companies and sell their product to ourselves. We take a pittance in pay while the biggest chunk of the products value leaves the country. Eventually that value collects in the pockets of top chinese officials that send it back in the hands of their kids who come here to buy up all of our fucking houses. And the money from the sale of those houses just goes back to a bunch of other foreign owned companies.
>>58395828
believes so strongly in his ideology that he would unquestionably sacrifice his own family and future generations to it
it's like a cult or crackheah
crackhead*
>>58394857
>It works.
Okay Todd Howard.
Why don't you prove it? We've been doing it for 30 years, so surely you have overwhelming evidence by now? You must have something more than the exact same THEORY that was suggested during the Regan era?
If trickle down economics works, where does the 6 quadrillion dollarido debt come from?
Where is the money trickling to to leave such a gaping hole?
>>58394857
as george carlin said, the american dream is one of the biggest lies told to americans.
its the "done give up hope, you can be rich one day if you work hard enough" BS.
>>58394857
it doesn't really help that it's trickling down into china and india instead of the western world
>>58398241
And go into more debt?
How about we just raise taxes on the ones who outsource instead.
>But muh prices
Prices barely decreased in the past 20 years despite outsourcing.
>>58403812
>>58404320
Nice samefagging there.
idiot thinks if ppl have an iphone that should be enough. the rich may want more then they could ever use but for most an iphone is enough
>>58397450
Every loser on benefits has a fucking iPhone in the first world.
that should be good enough for them
what's with these ppl? it's almost like they want everyone to have low expectations and be failures so they don't feel alone
>>58397450
probably the pinnacle of success for him.
some ppl might loot others ppl pensions plans or strip companies of their assets maybe loot whole countries for their own personal profit .
but an iphone is enough for his fellow serfs
>>58397516
>there are thousands of new cars parked in lots all over the planet that will never be sold because of the way the system works.
capitalism creates abundance
commies create barren misery
>>58402340
If it worked, it would work indefinitely. You can't say an economic policy worked for a few years. You're not that bright.
>>58394857
Personal experience (which may not count for much) tells me that it's a more one-way thing. Things don't trickle down at a rate fast enough to appease the current crop of libtards but the sort of thing that would appease them will drive away those who are necessary to keep the machine running.
>>58397708
liar liar , commie on fire
http://www.snopes.com/photos/automobiles/unsoldcars.asp
nice commie dream though, those evil unionized car makers should give all you commies a free brand new car but hey it's all just wasted because they hate you... the nignog
>>58394857
Here's how it REALLY works.
>>58397921
>see that part of the problem, now you're gonna have to tell ppl how to live and not to expect much
no need, the misery index and Jimmah Carter our peanut potus did that for us... I still wear a cheap wool sweater and keep the heat at 65 degrees...
ROFLMAO - COMMIE COMMIE FUCKIE
>>58421956
lol the commies developed as much in 30 years as the west did in 300
>>58422818
another idiot that didn't read it
>>58398682
>>he supports tariffs
>fuck off commie
TARIFFS used to be the entire income of the founded USA.....
furthest thing from commie eva'
>>58423000
can you live in a cardboard box and survive off eating your own shit tho?
when you can, you can brag about that
it's like they think they are winning a competition of who can live the most desolate life.
enjoy, Im not interested in that game
>>58396837
>completely missing the point of the video
Trickle-Down "Theory" is not a theory at all that is advocated by any leading economist or historical economic theory of thought. Hence when questioned the political show hosts who chat about "Trickle Down Theory" majorly refer to it as "Supply side econ." Which is false as well. Because no one is advocating its position this is by definition a "Strawman Argument"
Strawman Argument: [A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.]
1
: a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted
2
: a person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction
-Source-
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/straw%20man
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
The argument in the video isn't a strawman because the [and most commonly used by those who are in political left origins as well as those whom never taken an economics class... ever] use this term as if it has some meat or backing behind it. So not only is it a strawman its also Appeals to Authority Fallacy, as well.
>>58394857
>Why doesn't it work?
in a word: greed
the universal human foible which intensifies ingravescently the more wealth one accumulates, results in pathological money junkies hoarding wealth; with their apathy towards the impact of their sickness proportionate to that which they possess
There is no such thing as trickle down economics.
It is a straw man created by the left.
Find me an economist that believes in it.
>>58423548
fucktard gun-huggers label everything that's not fucking their sister with a shotty barrel "commie"
>>58395828
This must be sarcasm.
>>58394857
Trickle down works guys
>>58397450
They may have some device that lets them be a narcisst 24/7, but they have a smaller share of total productivity than they did 40 years ago.
A single income could afford a home, a car, meals out, good food. Shit that *matters*.
http://www.epi.org/publication/ib330-productivity-vs-compensation/
>>58424623
>Australia
>>58397700
Whether someone can afford something and whether they can buy something are not the same thing at all. You can get a used iPhone for $200. A mortgage is a minimum $1,200 a month outside of the ghetto. A good life is expensive, trite luxuries aren't.
>>58397520
But having an Iphone and saying that they need EBT card is a complete fucking insane proposition.
I remember all of the "Destitute" people in line for fee dental care in LA 6 years ago and the news was filming saying how terrible it was that they could not afford to have their teeth fixed.
However, every dindo in line had a smart phone of other cell phone waiting in line. Sounds more like they are misappropriating their own funds.
>>58397716
A used iPhone is not an indication of wealth outside of the third world.
>>58394857
stfu muslim
>>58397829
Reducing taxes to zero and removing all regulations will not bring good jobs back to expensive countries. The only defense against slave labour is tariffs.
Capitalism will soon (50 years) eat itself as it doesn't have consumers for the massive potential production through automation. Revolution or mass taxation and redistribution will be the only way to solve this. Well, either that or the rich will succeed in killing everyone, the optimal capitalist system has one person owning everything with zero costs to operate consuming only what he needs.
Without something to temper this market failure of employment income not meeting optimal supply, society will literally collapse.
Jews, probably. I dunno.
>>58397850
Retard doesn't know there's a middle ground between a Soviet command economy and gilded age exploitation.
Fucking idiots like you an Ayn Rand thought the worst thing in the world was communism but didn't realize the whole fucking reason it came into being was how bad capitalism became. Capitalism needs to be tempered with social economic policy or the people are treated like cattle - just like communism.
>>58397993
Yeah all those houses that were literally torn down after foreclosures isn't an example of market failure at all. Notwithstanding what predicated the collapse, letting houses rot rather than putting someone in them is retarded.
>>58398096
No one freely trades anything unless they're rich. Anyone who has to work to survive is at the beck and call of the monied and landed.
The state protects their status while the peons dream hopelessly of being free of wage kekery, while *maybe* a couple percent can ever actually escape by design and economic fact.
>>58398432
Markets work but they have glaring failures in many cases. Believing the invisible hand will always solve every problem better than actually having people work on it via regulation is insane. If that was the case we wouldn't need a justice system.
>>58398577
Why do you fags have a hard on for something you can get with a couple days of minimum wage pay used on Ebay?
>>58398709
Which is why stimulus should go to people who will actually fucking spend it. Military spending is better than giving cash to the banks. Stimulus should come in the form of mass infrastructure or other projects that pay wages and build shit.
>>58398798
Muh iPhone.
Who gives a fuck about a fucking shitty phone when you can't pay rent? Phones are fucking cheap and mostly a waste of time. We had fucking newspapers and shit to keep ourselves entertained. They're not the godsend faggots think they are.
>>58398926
This is why Trump is based. First politician in decades to suggest such things.
>>58398473
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/mr-kong-a-cage-dweller-sits-in-a-cage-on-june-20-2007-in-news-photo/74862490
>>58399283
Turns out it's complete bullshit outside of extremely high taxes. Kansas being a hilarious, glaring example of this failure.
>>58422354
Economies are constantly changing, and it's irrational to expect that one single policy would, or even COULD be maintained with the same effect as it was intended to.
>>58399350
With proper tax law you can encourage them to spend on their business rather than taking it as profit and taking it out of the country. Canada just found this out and even our right wing think tanks agree.
Tax breaks for investment and higher taxes on profits make sense. This isn't simple and only fucking idiots think it is. The economy isn't some magical thing you can just take your hands off and it will always be better. That's religion, not sanity.
>>58426234
it would be better if they got rid of the irs.
While we only have a sales tax at a store. The stores profits are taxed 5%-10%.
Also remove all social security and social welfare programs.
>>58394857
Well the actually happens part of your poster makes no sense. Is the wine flowing up back into the wine bottle. How does that work?
>>58398432
Yeah ..... no
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/study-bottled-water-safer-tap-water/story?id=87558
http://www.rd.com/health/wellness/rethink-what-you-drink/
http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/diseases.html
http://www.waterbenefitshealth.com/water-pollution-facts.html
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/10/conflict-minerals/gettleman-text
http://web.mit.edu/12.000/www/m2016/finalwebsite/problems/mining.html
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/06/06/why-mining-and-burning-coal-could-slowly-be-killing-us/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/oceanic-dead-zones-spread/
http://www.alternet.org/story/148077/fertilizer_runoff_is_killing_our_waterways
Who's going to clean that shit up? Capitalism? Sure have failed so far and they're only making things worse.
>>58399588
Yep, QE is vastly increasing the wealth of the rich while the middle class and poor remain stagnant. It' ridiculous.
>>58394857
Trickle-down economics is a term created by opponents of supply-side economics. It's the left equivalent of calling everything you don't like "socialism." Completely meaningless term.
Wealth was never supposed to "trickle down." The goal was to get wealth and use it to create more wealth.
>>58425633
>Yeah all those houses that were literally torn down after foreclosures isn't an example of market failure at all. Notwithstanding what predicated the collapse, letting houses rot rather than putting someone in them is retarded.
But it wasn't an example of a market failure? Do you know how many failings of governance lead to the sub-prime?
Removal of regulations.
Huge government involvement via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Failures within the legal system related to SPVs
And then the government went and bailed everyone out on the taxpayer dime after they screwed the pooch.
Am I missing something here? Is this me being retarded for suggesting that the role of government enabled and exacerbated the supply glut in housing?
>>58426536
>Yep, QE is vastly increasing the wealth of the rich while the middle class and poor remain stagnant. It' ridiculous.
Again, I think you fail to grasp the role of government in this.
>>58426446
let the disabled, orphans and mentally ill starve
>>58402107
Except correct taxation will have the rich spend more.
Corporate taxes that have write offs for investment and hiring and higher taxes on taking profit will encourage job creation and capital investment.
>>58402836
Yeah except the shitty thing is they often take those hard earned profits and move them overseas.
Smart tax policy encourages investment, not profit taking.
>>58404436
Muh technology.
Who gives a fuck? Anyone with half a brain would rather have the relative share of production they did 40 years ago with their own god damn house paid and a gigantic retirement fund piling up.
>>58404889
Adam Smith debunked himself. He wasn't the religious idiot about his analysis like his later followers.
Because it is a meme strawman people like to throw around to dodge the actual point
The act of a government promoting businesses by providing low tax rates/tax breaks strengthens the middle class. Not by means of rich people handing you bags of cash directly.
Rather, keeping an active job market provdes more people with middle-to-upper middle incomes and promotes economic growth and lowered unemployment
>>58427197
You realize that technology reduces the real costs of things right?
If you invest in technology you can (generally speaking) make goods more affordable across the board?
>>58426458
If I recall correctly bottled water is municipal tap water...
>>58427772
it's paying for low wage jobs
walmart cost taxpayers 6.2 billion a year and put thousands of self sustaining mom & pops outta business
>>58394857
Works only really well in a consumerist culture that is highly concious of social status.
Without that element, it becomes all rather complicated as the wealth doesn't trickle down, but also jumps sideways and upwards.
>>58394857
>>58424363
You're right, protecting the commons for the sole exploitation by the rich *is* wrong. The use of violence by the state to protect the assets of the rich while they do nothing but rent seek is the worst thing ever!
Didn't know /pol/ was so redpilled.
>>58428574
a traitor in so many ways
>>58428515
Apparently big box retail stores are literally the only industry in America.
>>58427839
Addendum: You keep harping on about the labor share of productivity and fail to point out that...
- The US Dollar has been devalued (by inflation) by approximately 98% since the 1900s. See: Government.
- Taxes have risen successively across the board.
- Mortgages were not prevalent back then, and now they are the norm. If you're transferring your future earnings into a loan today, of course the price of housing will be elevated.
- Furthermore the global population has grown exponentially over the last half century and we still have better average living standards than at any time in known history.
Take a look at other goods, consumables and so on you'll see they have declined in real price. That's all based on technology and using energy to produce things in more efficient ways.
>>58426446
While tax law is grossly over complicated, particularly in the US, the best plan is to simplify tax law to encourage investment and penalize moving money overseas. Tax profits and give tax breaks for hiring and investment. Tariff imports vs slave states and tax money when it leaves the country.
>>58394857
Trickle down is big government bullshit based on the cronyist economy and federal reserve which benefits big banks more than real people. There should be no government subsidies.
>>58401006
>I'll take government programs for 1200 alex
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/dropout/index.html
>the grant in my state at least means that while going back to school to get your HSD you get 1600 a month to live off of.
>>58426690
Except supply side economics never made sense as there is no supply without demand. Supply side economics is literally commie economics in that it assumes suppliers are better at spending money than consumers.
>>58426693
Hence notwithstanding the cause. The market did fuck all to rectify the problem like it should in the event of a disaster.
Markets solve problems but not always perfectly. Had the state done the intelligent thing and taking half that TARP money and given it directly to mortgage holders the market would have been much better off.
It's only a perverse inventive though when it's poor people. Giving mass amounts of cash to rich people when they fucked up is just good policy.
>>58401122
Right because they only buy yachts, homes and cars? They don't have security, cooks, chauffeurs? They don't eat? They don't have people taking care of their pool, lawns, laundry? They don't have BUSINESSES that employ people?
>>58426865
Not even slightly. QE is the government being absolutely bent over the barrel by the elite and implementing policies the elite want. A real leader would hang those traitors and give QE to consumers in the form of infrastructure and major projects.
The government has been taken over by a class of investment bankers that don't give a fuck about nations, in fact they're actively trying to destroy them.
>>58424737
>>>58395828
>This must be sarcasm.
it is for commie fucks who hate the rich so much they would NEVER work for them
lots of those faggots around nowadays - though one surmises their hate principle would instantly evaporate if offered lucrative work... maybe the skill set is so small and pathetic that would never occur
better to show up at the build port and scream "we all own this" with a world workers unite sign
>>58429096
just shoes how perverted the economic system is
>>58429266
>Markets solve problems but not always perfectly. Had the state done the intelligent thing and taking half that TARP money and given it directly to mortgage holders the market would have been much better off.
>It's only a perverse inventive though when it's poor people. Giving mass amounts of cash to rich people when they fucked up is just good policy.
What about the perverse incentive of letting people take mortgages with little notable cash, or assets, and then bailing them out?
Are you for real guy? How about giving NO ONE MONEY for fucking up? How does that sound?
>>58427839
It does and it has, but real productivity has skyrocketed while the average person has seen little to no meaningful increase in buying power.
http://www.epi.org/publication/ib330-productivity-vs-compensation/
I'd give up all this bullshit technology to have what my parents did in the early 70's. Though things were going to shit by the 80's.
>>58397715
If it is commonplace, then it is an indicator of "average", perhaps "below average". Wealth by definition must be rarer than commonplace, or are you suggesting that most of USA is 'wealthy' folks?
>>58429389
>Not even slightly. QE is the government being absolutely bent over the barrel by the elite and implementing policies the elite want. A real leader would hang those traitors and give QE to consumers in the form of infrastructure and major projects.
>The government has been taken over by a class of investment bankers that don't give a fuck about nations, in fact they're actively trying to destroy them.
I guess I'm imagining all that liquidity being used to prop up pension funds and asset markets for the Boomer generation then?
And all of the money made by the legal experts who are rinsing investment banks and bankers in settlements.
You have a very twisted world view, mate.
>>58428454
Food has remained constant, mortgages were extremely prevalent if you lived in my country. Everyone had one and was able to get one in their early 20's.
Inflation and wages have kept pace but real productivity disconnected around the time of the oil crisis.
QE actually does have something to do with this in that the rich get ahold of the debt first and use it to buy up assets which the kek workers usually have no share of. Technology massively increased productivity while the owners benefited and the workers stagnated.
>>58429096
supply always grows towards the demand and supply growth is economic growth: making goods/services cheaper for consumers thereby increasing their purchasing power
>>58429483
NWO sheep
as long as you can get yours, right
>>58424928
>A single income could afford a home, a car, meals out, good food. Shit that *matters*.
it still does - STOP BUYING THE MOTHERLODE OF EXTRA SHIT YOU DON'T NEED AND THEY NEVER HAD
>>58411722
Frankly, anyone who's stupid enough to go broke trying to keep up with billionaires when they already have 9 figure wealth should be taxed into oblivion on general fucking principle.
There's regular greed and then there's just plain fucking stupid greed.
>>58398851
That looks about right.
>>58429483
The rich as a percent of consumption are tiny, not on the map.
The issue isn't their consumption but how they move and use their money. Huge amounts has been shifting overseas or literally sitting as *cash* in non-investment banks with 100% security.
>>58394857
Wow are you autistic of hwat?
If I could earn a middle class salary by putting in little effort, I would indeed put little effort
If everyone in the class got a school mandated 'C' no matter if they were an A student of an F student. Guess what? Nobody would actually try, and all get their neetbux anyways. Sound like a great way to have an innovative society!
>>58429508
Jesus christ you just proved my point.
Someone had to be bailed out or the economy literally would have crashed. That's not debatable.
But the powers that be would rather give money to a bunch of rich assholes who fucked up instead of the rubes who took out mortgages they couldn't afford.
>>58429565
>It does and it has, but real productivity has skyrocketed while the average person has seen little to no meaningful increase in buying power.
So equity has taken the lion's share. I will concede that this is a concern to an extent.
>I'd give up all this bullshit technology to have what my parents did in the early 70's. Though things were going to shit by the 80's.
Yeah? Well I'd love to live in the Age of Enlightenment. What's your point? We have to deal with what we have inherited. It doesn't start with a Marxist revolution and you come across as Marxist in some of your posting.
>>58429728
It's being used to prop up a ponzi scheme that has a few pricks at the top getting rich while the middle class has stagnated. Most boomers have no savings whatsoever or very little. The meme they're all rich is bullshit.
All QE should be going to value added projects and not to bankers to decide who gets the loans. That's how we did it 40 years ago and it worked fine. Mass projects to inject liquidity. Investment bankers are usually parasites.
Wealth disparity does not justify initiation of violence.
>>58429746
Retarded. Supply won't do shit unless consumers have money. That's what happened in the great depression. Supply massively outstripped demand. So long as demand doesn't get too hot supply should be able to rapidly meet the needs of demand, particularly in today's world.
>>58430018
>Jesus christ you just proved my point.
No I didn't.
>Someone had to be bailed out or the economy literally would have crashed. That's not debatable.
Because socialist systems have never had crashes, nor have communist regimes? Are you just trolling now?
The economy will crash at times. It's called the business cycle. You cannot eliminate it. People would have survived and recovered. Life will go on.
Incentivizing moronic behavior with financial reward is anti-capitalist at its very core.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsBl28yAB3w#t=43
>>58429822
Not in this part of the world it fucking doesn't. A shithole house after property taxes is $2,200 a month, not including utilities. Average household income is $45k a year and that's with two people working. Do the fucking math.
http://www.epi.org/publication/ib330-productivity-vs-compensation/
Wages and real productivity disconnected right around the time everyone with a brain realizes both the gravy train ended the and the neocons started fucking us.
"Trickle-down economics" is a strawman buzzword used by butthurt left-wingers to indirectly insult classic liberalism and libertarianism, prove me wrong.
>>58430032
What we inherited is a neoconservative economic system that needs to die in a fire.
Marxism is fucking retarded. We simply need to revert to injecting liquidity via actual production in the form of infrastructure, research, whatever, instead of handing it to bankers who are skimming huge amounts off the top and spending it overseas or simply buying up companies.
>>58398660
>>58397724
>trickle down is killed by outsourcing
HA! The economy here is being killed by the giant companies like Costco, Walmart, HEB, etc.
And the natural resources are being sucked by Canadian and Murican companies.
>>58410036
not sure how familiar you are with Detroit but a whole lot of businesses are currently moving in to take advantage of how cheap it's getting
If only you could get all the niggers to leave that place would be a free market utopia already
>>58430474
I'd say you're the butthurt one ignoring the massive and significant usage by right wing parties (specifically American ones, don't know shit about Panama in relation to that / it's usage) to justify hatred of liberals.
Trickle Down economics is probably one of the most central doctrines of republican and i'd dare say global right wing economic theory.
>>58430355
Some crashes are to be expected, and I'm not saying we should go commie.
Markets are a great way to solve problems but they also have massive failures. Using our banking system to enrich the most craven and useless in our society while ignoring the system of Keynesian economics that worked for 30 years has been our downfall.
Infrastructure, major projects, research, defense, or business development loans from the government, these are all much better stimulus projects that don't create inverse wealth disparity than handing money to banks.
>>58430709
No it's not, the only people that use the word "trickle-down economics" are butthurt left-wingers, the same way only butthurt left-wingers use the word "neo-liberal".
>>58430205
>It's being used to prop up a ponzi scheme
The Ponzi Scheme is in public sector debt. See: Government.
>..that has a few pricks at the top getting rich while the middle class has stagnated.
This has been a characteristic of all failing economic systems. Including communism. The difference in a communist system is that the rich pricks are bureaucrats rather than equity owners.
>Most boomers have no savings whatsoever or very little. The meme they're all rich is bullshit.
I must be missing all those public pension plans, medicare, medicaid, etc. The problem is the socialist systems put in place which are now rapidly approaching default, and need perpetually higher taxes to exist.
>>58430474
Libertarianism is the ultimate expression of pro globalist cukoldery in that you literally want to be owned by a rich person.
Marxism is no solution but neither is its polar opposites. The neckbeard is just as thick on both sides of that horseshoe. You're just exchanging one master for another.
Supply side economics is simply asinine in that it assumes, like communism, that the powers that be spend money better than consumers.
>>58416248
Oh crap. This is the only post that seems to make any sense at all. It's the only thing rich people would do. I've been changed by your post.
>>58397619
>Seeing as the middle class is shrinking, due to the fact that they are MOVING UP into the upper class
I fully approve of people believing this.
Please, keep up the good work. We really appreciate whatever it is you 'people' do down there.
You people are so fucking stupid, it makes me cringe.
Trickle down theory works.
Here's the thing: we enacted free trade policies at the same time.
The wealth trickled down to BRIC developing countries.
We effectively have to compete with 3 billion poor people. Of course wages have stagnated.
>>58430807
There is zero issue with public sector debt when it's value added and not simply a piggy bank for the rich. All this debt has been a wealth transfer to the wealthy, particularly the last 10 years.
Absolute communism and absolute capitalism are horseshoe theory in action. They both end up dominated by assholes. The best system is in between and we've drifted from that since the neocon revolution in the '70s.
None of those are insolvent in my country, they were correctly invested. Only in countries utterly dominated by the right that are bringing down western civilization is that an issue.
Politicians that are encouraging capital movement to poor countries and imports from poor countries.are the enemy of the developed world. Before that happened with Nixon and his cronies in China the rich pretty much had to dump their money back into the economy.
>>58416248
Well that's terrifyingly accurate.
We seriously need to end this free trade shit. It's going to kill us.
>>58430956
>owned by a rich person
>owned
It's a voluntary and thus mutually beneficial agreement between your employer and yourself which gives you more wealth than communism where you are literally owned by the government.
>>58430792
>the only people that use the word "trickle-down economics"
Literally false. Even if you want to discard the term, the prevailing idea of "Don't Tax the rich, they're job creators" (i.e. they use their expansive wealth to fund the economy. i.e. Their wealth trickling down.) is still a main part of most of the worlds right wing economic policies.
Also fuck off you millenial shit. Just because you're old enough to only care about what 'da libruls sed sumfin mean!!' doesn't mean a solid 20 years of American economic policy being dominated by 'Reaganomics,' trickle down theory and supply side economics just up and didn't happen.
You're just a reactionary retard who only cares about My party vs Their party and want to slander them because they're pointing out faults with your particular ideology.
Build Canal you retarded spic fuck.
>>58431227
Jesus fuck that's how trickle down hasn't worked as a policy. Why the fuck would we want to destroy ourselves to help the rich and a bunch of foreigners who are happy to suck the cocks of their masters?
>>58430956
>owned by a rich person
This is some ridiculous shit that keynesians and left-wingers always parrot.
Free trade policies are empirically proven to work, specially on developing countries, just look at latin america and notice how all the shittest spic countries are left-wing.
>>58431338
If you aren't rich nothing is voluntary in a capitalist system. You need to work to eat, the rich have their land and capital protected by the military and the state, you are a slave. If there is no social welfare you are even more a slave.
capitalism works, but needs to have its slate wiped clean every once in a while. it gradually creates inequalities, creating a Colossus compared to the low peons, whereas communism just has peons that starve because there is no incentive. capitalism develops incentives to work hard and succeed, which is logical, but when there are chains and the slate is grimy with hopelessness in the hearts of the peons, something is wrong.
>>58431227
>wages have stagnated
WHO
FUCKING
CARES
purchasing power increases because the cost of businesses drops
>>58431513
Aren't rents and housing prices at their highest levels in most major cities / economic centers across America?
>>58431488
You are a slave to your survival not to capitalism. Go subsistence farm, oh wait we figured out a better alternative system.
Social welfare is slavery to the poor and generally lazy.
>>58431465
As wealthy countries and as wealthy country voters we should be voting against any policy that makes us poorer while some other poor country gets richer.
Free trade is fucking great for China and Bangladesh, at least their party elite, it's fucking shitty for the workers here who now have to compete. The only people over here that benefit are the capitalists that are pocketing the price difference in production vs sell price.
>>58431363
>american economy dominated by reaganomics
>had Obama and keynesians for the last 20 years
Sure, the federal reserve and bailouts are libertarian as fuck.
>>58431413
Are you 10 years old? Companies will simply open up subsidiaries in other countries where they do a fuckton of transactions with related companies and just end up paying less taxes, taxing businesses more just causes companies to move further away, which is technically good for developing countries.
>>58431235
>
None of those are insolvent in my country, they were correctly invested.
No. Your country is just behind the curve slightly.
Median age in Canada: 39.8 years old.
Median age in the US: 36.8 years old
Median age in The Netherlands: 41.2 years old
Median age in Sweden: 41.2 years old
Median age in Germany: 46.1 years old
Median age in Japan: 46.1 years old
The most kek'd countries are the ones with aging populations.
>Only in countries utterly dominated by the right that are bringing down western civilization is that an issue.
Are you kidding me? Germany is dominated by the right? The Netherlands? Sweden? Japan?
What?
>>58430451
>Not in this part of the world it fucking doesn't. A shithole house after property taxes is $2,200 a month
WELL THERE WE HAVE IT- THE ELITE ASS SUCKING FOOL
2.2k x12 x30 = $ 792,000.00 for a shithole
way to go this part of the world - and it's still a shithole....
is your golden caviar ass implant fresh today ?
>>58431513
The cost of business has dropped but employees haven't got shit.
http://blogs.piie.com/realtime/files/2015/07/lawrence20150721-figure1.png
>>58431513
I surely don't give a shit. It only sucks for the poor idiots here that can't figure out how to adapt to a changing economy.
>>58431748
> Only liberals use the term Trickle Down Economics!
That's what you said, you're wrong. Now you're moving the goalpost.
>>58431635
Go subsistence farm where?
The state monopolizes all the land for the use of the rich. It monopolizes all commerce via its currency for the benefit of the rich.
You want a system where all of that happens yet the rich don't have to give fuck all back. You are a gigantic blue pilled kekold to the merchants.
>>58431842
>arguing buzzwords instead of arguing the argument
>>58431765
germany and japan are, i don't know about the other 2
>>58431608
>https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/grossrents.html
>http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
>muh myths
>>58431828
>A+ on the paper!
>>58431840
Yup, idiot poors need to get employable skills if they don't want to be "poor" (whatever that means in America), I can't wait for automation so I can get my shit dirt cheap.
>>58431925
Buy cheap land and go subsistence farm poorfag and see what poverty really means.
>>58431748
Retard, if they can't import their goods and services without massive tarrifs they won't bother. Free trade is a joke for idiot internationalists and their merchant buddies. We've lived in a world without tariffs for so long we think there's no option but to be raped by said merchants.
The US economy has been run by Reagonomics 35 years solid. Keynesian economics would be mass spending on things like infrastructure, not giving money to bankers.
>>58431964
> Changing the topic instead of arguing the argument.
You said something, i argued you were wrong, you went WAH WAH OBAMA! i pointed out that you're changing the topic and now you're greentexting and reactionmeming.
Good show m8.
>>58430783
>Infrastructure
Very decent, and failing infrastructure needs to be maintained, but it doesn't create much roi. Yes, I understand roads, bridges, tunnels, and electric grids 1. Tend to be nonrivalrous and nonexcludable and 2..have a multiplier effect which under-girds and facilitates private investment many times over, but x% depreciation in infrastructure does not threaten x% of the private commerce which uses said infrastructure. Once it reaches (x+n)% depreciation (there are various acturarial methods used to calculate this) is it most efficient to do infrastructure repairs or overhauls. Below that curve, it's dumping money into pitfalls that will occur again in a year, so it's best to let problems accumulate a bit to fix them all in one go. Above the curve, the problems have advanced to the point where it costs more money to repair and overhaul them than if it was done continuously.
Apart from nuclear projects and sure-thing natural resource excavation, most infrastructure projects simply throw money into places where it was going to go already, get milked by unions, and those pavers, linemen, rf engineers, civil engineers etc go back to their default state.
>major projects
It depends on the project. Mostly this falls under the economic calculation problem. A prime example is the various dams built under the Tennessee Valley Authority, which provided temporary employment and GDP growth, and provided power to those communities, (in some cases opening up farm land, in some cases closing it)in the long term fucked the fishing industry and delayed nuclear in those ares.
>>58431765
What the hell are you talking about? Median age has nothing to do with it. CPP is literally an investment fund. Pension plans were put into markets and own businesses. We did it nothing like the US.
>>58431795
http://www.crackshackormansion.com/
No, property prices are just fucking retarded because rich Chinamen have been buying them all up. The only places property is affordable have no fucking jobs. I make twice the median and it's still retarded.
>>58432072
Better yet, we get the fucking system back we had 40 years ago where merchant bankers weren't monopolizing our debt, and instead it was reinvested in our country.
Even better, we stop doing business with fucking slave states and tariff the shit out of any products and services made in them.
The west has been destroyed by kekold neocons like yourself who would rather "adapt" to being fucked in the ass than kill the fucker fucking you.
>>58432099
But by implementing high tariffs you're saying your local consumers (the people) to buy local shit, even if it's inferior, unsustainable and more expensive, or fuck off.
By removing or considerably lowering tariffs you're giving consumers a chance to buy cheaper products of higher quality.
If you have an industry that can't survive without government subsidies and regulations, then it shouldn't even exist, you're basically saying that you'd gladly suck corporatist cock as long as it's canadian corporatist cock, mental gymnastics given that you're whining about global trade.
>>58432118
Infrastructure is a very broad term. Investing in the infrastructure to create new research is still infrastructure.
Really throwing money out of a plane would have a better ROI than giving it to bankers that send it overseas. ANYTHING is better than what we do now.
>>58432031
>germany and japan are, i don't know about the other 2
You're going to have to validate this with something. The socialist state is enormous in these nations. Taxes are absolutely outrageous in Europe.
>>58432415
Tariffs against shit made by slave wages. What that's saying is that our people are too good to compete with people that live in tenements and work 18 hour days and that we shouldn't have to lower our standards to compete.
You don't tariff countries on equal footing unless they're unfairly subsidizing their industry.
The only people who want trade with slave states are the merchant internationalists invested in overseas trade. The ones who don't want to pay labour a living wage and want the people to be slaves.
Fucking poor countries are undercutting our standard of living like the scabs would undercut the unions during the industrial revolution. We're the fucking union, we had good fucking jobs, they're the fucking scabs. Fuck them and their livelihood, I'm not an internationalist, I'm a nationalist. Our government should be looking out for us first.
>>58432726
>Tariffs against shit made by slave wages. What that's saying is that our people are too good to compete with people that live in tenements and work 18 hour days and that we shouldn't have to lower our standards to compete.
But if your product was superior then people would buy it instead.
>>58432726
>Fucking poor countries are undercutting our standard of living like the scabs would undercut the unions during the industrial revolution. We're the fucking union, we had good fucking jobs, they're the fucking scabs. Fuck them and their livelihood, I'm not an internationalist, I'm a nationalist. Our government should be looking out for us first.
Keynesianism and merchantilism worked ages ago when the global market was controlled by a minority of countries, now anyone can efficiently manufacture and trade shit, deal with it pinko.
>>58432190
>What the hell are you talking about? Median age has nothing to do with it. CPP is literally an investment fund. Pension plans were put into markets and own businesses. We did it nothing like the US.
I am not aware of this fund, but in that case it's likely that the US QE is actually supporting Canadian pensions.
Your pensions will also be bounded by the global economy and/or global population demographics.
>>58426911
You don't need a government to feed them.
>>58432973
The product isn't going to be superior, that's not the point.
If something is made by shit paid labour that means we have to lower our standards to compete with it.
Communists were the biggest internationalist stooges that ever existed.
Anyone has always been able to manufacture something, what we did was tariff them to protect our industry and build it up, to make sure our businesses couldn't buy cheap scab labour from overseas that lowered our standard of living.
Trump is literally saying he's going back to that, and the overton window is shifting away from merchant lies. This neocon shit is over in less than 10 years and those fucks are going to prison.
pls reach a consensus. is commie-wommie bad or is capitalism mean to the tiny peoples
>>58433063
Gilded age. Spoiler alert, they died immediately or ground away in workhouses and died in their teens.
>>58432726
In fact, I'm looking at the fund and where its capital is allocated and I can say without any doubt that US and European QE programs are supporting your pensions by propping up asset prices.
So in fact, you're arguing something absolutely ridiculous here.
>>58433237
Both.
Anything worth doing is fucking hard and a functioning economic system is a complex balance between social and market economic policy. Government has ALWAYS been hard, ask the Romans.
trickle down economics, give us all the champagne to drink so we can then piss on top of your head.
>>58433285
And if asset prices universally devalue then commodity and the rest of the basket of prices will deflate just the same, thus requiring less payouts. Whoopdeedoo Basel.
Fact is the funds are diversified so that any major hit to the economy they'll weather the storm.
>>58433203
>If something is made by shit paid labour that means we have to lower our standards to compete with it.
Or maybe you could lower taxes and the minimum wage, and remove a fuckton of socialistic policies?
Can't believe I'm arguing with a Trudeau kek that's actually supporting socialism.
>>58433520
Taxes could be zero and it wouldn't matter. You're comparing people getting paid $25 and hour and living in well furnished homes driving new cars vs fucking poor fags living in hovels making pennies an hour.
The people that want internationalism want equilibreum between us and the poor fags, and that equilibrium is only possible with free trade. Close the borders to the poor fags products and the rich have no option but to use expensive labour to access the market that requires expensive labour.
>>58433520
Tariffs aren't socialism either you fucking bluepilled merchant faggot.
>>58433520
Also Trudeau is a giant pro immigration pro free market douchebag. Forgot that, he's an internationalist merchant dog just like you.
>>58433486
>And if asset prices universally devalue then commodity and the rest of the basket of prices will deflate just the same, thus requiring less payouts.
>Whoopdeedoo Basel.
Get a load of this snide cunt.
>Fact is the funds are diversified so that any major hit to the economy they'll weather the storm.
Someone hasn't studied systematic risk, clearly.
>>58432543
Taxes are absolutely outrageous. is that how you think politics and political parties are measured?
the us is roughly the same in the top 5 or 10 but americans get almost nothing for it because a lot goes to the military
>>58430783
>research
Yes this elusive grand "research". There are cases where it 1. it is more economical for the government to do some R+D, since it's a field with high expenses, and long periods of potentially no ROI and 2. Where government research has yielded MASSIVE ROI in the private economy.
There are some issues though.
1. Underestimating the efficiency and output of private R+D departments. Most medical and pharmaceutical research? Dome by medical and pharmaceutical companies. Synthetic chemicals, polymers, fertilizers? By privately held chemical firms.
2. Overestimating government efficiency. Governments lack a price signal, and budgets can be set by majority vote in a chamber of failed attorneys seeking reelection, and notoriously fund failed projects. For every DARPA, there are 10 failures, like the NIH's grant to the Alternative Medicine center.
3. The governments' taking X (scientists, engineers, medical researchers, analysts etc) out of the private economy- armed with huge taxpayer-based budgets, large departments, eminent domain, security clearances to fence in certain data, and political kickbacks, the gov can suck up most of X and put them to use more expensively and less effectively. T
4. And putting X into less productive ends.
Do you recall the argument that warfare accelerates STEM growth? Well how would we know if the gov didn't put X to warmaking- a destructive effort- that that progress wouldn't have happened at all? In fact, war or no war, the trend for scientific and medical development historically shot up.
We see this again with flight- yes the government commissioned a lot of aerospace projects- but they were mostly for military purposes, and stagnated development of commercial airlines since that's what was sucking up all the aerospace engineers- sometimes to unreal projects like multiplanes.
In a third example, we see this with telecom
>>58432973
>people always shop for the best product, and never for the cheapest that works
Not true. Nobody can tell me the Chinese make the best products. They do it for cheaper, meaning the price in Walmart can be cheaper, meaning more people who only look at price and basic function will buy it. You couldn't easily compete without lowering your workers quality of living and you know it.
>>58433850
somebody ban this canadian kek. stfu fag, you're bringing shame to our once-great nation. not every "fat cat" is out to get you. deal with it, you aren't the centre of everything. shit's been working, so deal with it.
>>58433253
There are plenty of charities, most of the people that get that shit don't deserve it.
Also, survival of the fittest.
>>58433063
yeah right, nice ppl like you would feed them
