>Cut taxes for himself and friends in the 1%. Hoard shekels
>"It will trickle down , guys , I swear!!"
>>70003799
*reaganomics meme.
>>70003799
Look at France.
Holland ramped up the taxes and we got hundreds of rich Frenchies coming into London escaping the taxes. If you 'tax the rich' they will just leave.
/thread
>>70003799
It's true
We shouldn't have either a progressive or regressive tax. Should be flat.
>>70003799
>Ha-Joon Hong
>real economist
Pick one
>Trickle down economics
Tell me which economist and theory espouses "Trickle Down Economics." Please provide a source.
>>70004005
True, but I really see no reason to keep rootless globalists around when you have a nice homogeneous society
>>70003799
>people keeping their own money is redistribution
Leftist double speak in action
>>70003799
>University of Cambridge
That's a funny way to spell "Marxist Indoctrination Center of Cambridge".
>>70004119
Trickle down is just a pejorative term for Reganomics.
>>70003799
>implying you first need to realize trickle down doesn't work
Since economics should be a continuation if naturalism, I think that first you should look at what is and then you draw conclusions about why. Currently, the gap between the rich and poor is wide and it has been increasing since Reagan. From this you can conclude that trickle down economics doesn't work.
>>70003799
what a socialist chink
as long as they respect Sharia the rich have a right to be rich
>>70004119
>please provide a source
OP fell for the memes himself.
>>70004005
So stop them from leaving.
>>70004005
Wouldn't be so bad if most of the capital flight could be avoided. There used to be laws to prevent it. Taxing the rich isn't even really possibly when a country doesn't have borders, there are many many ways to dodge it...
>>70004270
No one ever claimed that the weath would 'trickle down' though. Supply is needed for demand to exist, is all.
Where did that chink repeat that from?
>>70004005
Let them leave. The rich are not made of fairy dust and orgasms. The gaps they leave will be filled by someone else.
>>70004376
>There used to be laws to prevent it
Walls, too.
Piss off, commie.
>Thomas Sowell - Tax Cuts for 'The Rich'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMhI-AQgYPU
>>70003799
but middle class people have to pay taxes too
>>70004307
Who the fuck cares about "Muh Income Gap Brah?"
>>70004005
>make Nationalist laws that keep rich fucks from running away with their money
>force them BY LAW to either stay and work or leave without their money
>problem solved
>>70004471
>Let your most educated and intelligent population leave. The less qualified people will fill the gaps, even though we just passed regulation preventing them from doing so which is why the rich left in the first place.
>>70004433
>Supply is needed for demand to exist,
The fuck are you on about?
>>70004433
Supply side economics is a meme bro.
Sure a larger supply can drive down prices, but not to the level of completely overcoming the need for demand in the first place.
>>70004589
Yes, the partition of Berlin is the best example why countries shouldn't have strong borders.
You are a smarty.
>>70004701
Works for the people and businesses currently in your country. Anyone who wants to start a new company will just go to a country where the government doesn't punish them for it, or just not do it at all.
>>70004270
>not answering the question
Furthermore
>not realizing that Ronald Raygun cut taxes across the board for everyone
Stop listening to Rachel Maddow and Bill Mayer. They are not economists.
>>70004758
>most educated and intelligent
I don't know about the USA, but over here professors and scientists aren't arent't the richest guys around. They earn above average for sure, but they're not millionaires.
>>70004005
>muslim terrorist attacks has nothing to do with it, it's the taxes
lol
>>70004988
Strong borders are for keeping people out not in -- you want to keep people locked inside your socialist hellhole.
>>70004901
>>70004986
Of course you need demand, but supply creates demand in the first place.
No goods are demanded before they're supplied in the first place.
If the market stopped supplying goods, there would still be no demand because people must supply their labour to be able to demand goods.
>>70004005
Even if you do not ramp up taxes at all, the non patriotic rich will still leave the country if there's a place with better tax cuts. There's a reason every multinational company has its headquarters in stupid countries like Luxembourg.
>>70005100
Successful businesses are the ones giving educated and intelligent people jobs. Forcing corporations overseas will cause brain drain.
>>70005040
Then we won't let people leave our country either.
>>70005100
Let me rephrase it then. I was referring to your actually productive members of society instead of the tenured professors relying on the wealth generated by the former to even exist. Don't make the classic leftist mistake of assuming going to school automatically makes you intelligent.
>>70005232
Whether or not food is available to me, I will demand it.
>>70005137
No, people can leave. It's still a problem if a society invests a lot into education for example and then they just leave and compete with people in other countries where they had to pay for it. But that's unsolvable. You have to allow people to leave. The (non-human) capital flow can be restricted to some extent though.
>>70005342
Did you read the last few words in the last sentince?
>>70004005
>/threading your own post
oh... honey... no
thats... so embarrassing.
>>70005232
Are you fucking retarded?
What about Food? Basic human necessities? If suddenly every house went off the market tomorrow it wouldn't stop a homeless person from needing a house.
If there was no demand there would be no reason to supply something. I can go 'supply' the world with jars of piss and shit, just because i'm supplying them doesn't mean there is demand for them, and the more jars of pisshit i have won't increase demand for them.
>>70005232
Cars, iPhones, internet, guns, a better mouse trap.....
You serious or are you just Shitposting? If what you say is true, what's the point of inventing?
>>70004471
>The gaps they leave will be filled by someone else.
>>70005462
I don't think a limit on profit margins will keep people from trying to make profitable companies all together.
They'll still make alot of money just not as much as they would have under older and more lenient taxes.
>>70005418
>No, people can leave.
>You can leave but we'll take everything you own. We forced you to go to school therefore you owe us an amount of money that we get to decide and you have no say in -- please forget about the fact that your parents already paid for your education through their property taxes.
But I guess you agree that people who were home-schooled should be allowed to leave unmolested?
>>70005389
>>70005553
>>70005589
You could say that you could demand 12 sports cars, but you lack the means to pay for them.
To be able to even affort necessities such as food, you need to SUPPLY labour first.
If you want to talk about iPhones, what was the demand for iPhones before they were supplied?
Sure people always want better technology, but the demand for smartphones didn't exist before they were supplied.
>>70005819
I'm quite tired, and boy is my prose lacking.
>>70005137
Interestingly, capitalist countries makes it a problem for people to leave too by using debts. They ensure that most people cannot get an education and live without building up a lot of debt. They can just say fuck it all and leave, but then they become criminals.
>>70005819
I just want some tax free land where I can grow my own food and be left alone.
where can I obtain this?
>>70004471
John Maynard Keynes observed that
>taxation may be so high as to defeat its object"
and that
>"given sufficient time to gather the fruits, a reduction of taxation will run a better chance, than an increase, of balancing the Budget"
>When Maryland passed a higher tax rate on people earning a million dollars a year or more, taking effect in 2008, the number of millionaires living in Maryland fell from nearly 8000 to fewer than 6000.....
>...althought it had been projected that the additional tax revenue collected from the rich in Maryland would rise by $106 millions, instead these revenues FELL by $257 millions
>When the federal tax rate on capital gains was lowered in the United States from 28 percent to 20 percent in 1997 it was assumed that revenues from the capital gains tax would fall below the $54 billion collected under the old rates in 1996 and the $206 billion projected to be collected over the next four years, before the tax rate was cut. Instead tax revenues ROSE after the capital gains tax rate was cut: $372 billion were collected in capital gains taxes over the next four years, nearly twice what was projected
>In Iceland as the corporate tax rate was gradually reduced from 45 percent to 18 percent between 1991 and 2001, tax revenues TRIPLED
>>70005967
No countries exist without taxation.
Maybe in an anarchist society, but good luck finding one of those.
>>70005636
It will lower the incentive for people to sacrifice other things in life in order to provide goods and services for others. When someone strikes out in business, they're making a huge risk and a huge sacrifice, in the hope for a huge reward. There are many other, less risky and arduous, avenues that people can take in life, so by lowering the incentive for entrepreneurship you are going to dissuade a lot of people from taking on this challenge.`
>>70005936
Yes, someone voluntarily going into debt is equivalent to the government forcibly preventing people from leaving or otherwise robbing them on the way out. That's like blaming capitalism because I have to hire a moving company to get all my stuff to my new home.
>>70005091
He also legalized millions of mexicans.
>>70004307
this graph is a very good practice for economics. Tell me what is wrong with the 1st graph and why the 2nd one is misleading for your conclusion of income icreasing after reagan
>>70006002
Pull out a Laffer curve, lad.
>>70005819
>To be able to even affort necessities such as food, you need to SUPPLY labour first.
Okay so? What motivates you to supply this labour? Demand. How can you even deny this?? I don't go hunting unless I want to eat, but what you're saying is that I don't want to eat unless there are deer around.
>>70005819
>Sure people always want better technology, but the demand for smartphones didn't exist before they were supplied.
Smart phones are the 'better technology' you're saying people always want (demand). That demand also drives innovation, which is a precursor and necessary before supplying can begin.
Supply doesn't generate demand, nor does it control demand once demand has been proven and supply initiated.
I think you're just arguing about the semantics of supply here, given you keep talking about labour supply in the same breath.
>>70005936
>"people" can't get an education or live without a ""lot"" of debt
That's a pretty large generalization
>>70006002
>>In Iceland as the corporate tax rate was gradually reduced from 45 percent to 18 percent between 1991 and 2001, tax revenues TRIPLED
Everyone should become a tax heven then, what could go wrong?
Are you actually retarded or you pretend to be one?
>>70006118
Fair enough.
>>70006080
There must be some forest somewhere where I can live without the tax man finding me.
I hate money.
>>70004307
The higher economic freedom is, the higher you can expect the gini coefficient to be. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. If you recruit 10 random persons from the population, gave them a week to learn Java, and then starting paying them based on how quickly they could complete Java exercises, no one would be surprised when they saw an income disparity. Yet when these same people look at this EXACT process play out on the market, they are outraged. Usually they don't even have a set criteria for deeming the distribution system to be "unfair"; it's an arbitrary evaluation they make when the numbers get spaced out a bit. The fact is they are economically illiterate and wouldn't know a healthy distribution of wealth if it slapped them in the face.
"The top 1%" is a meme used by dirty politicians to prey on ignorance in the general population, and no one is willing to step up and seriously question whether this metric has a hint of validity when it comes to monetary policy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi8clPrg7kc
>>70006520
What you hate is tyranny, not money.
>>70005819
>the demand for smartphones didn't exist before they were supplied
The demand for Internet access and cellphones did, though. The technology to make your microwave tweet you when it's done cooking exists (and someone made one), but there is no demand. Just because something exists doesn't mean people want it, and just because something isn't obtainable doesn't mean there isn't demand. There is a demand for sex robots, but none have ever been sold. I get why you think what you do, but outside your smartphone example it breaks down. There may not appear to be preexisting demand for an innovative product, but if it sells well, the demand was there.
>>70006171
The result is similar, yes. I don't get your moving company analogy.
If a society invests in its citizen, it's a problem if they just leave. But I'm not against stopping them. Other types of capital flight could be prevented though. I believe that people with a strong culture can chose to stick together. It helps if it has its own language too.
>>70003799
NOt sure how a tax cut is a redistribution of wealth outside of believing that their money is given to them by the government in the first place.
>>70004701
>break constitutional law of freedom of travel
>forcibly take money from the people who own successful companies and give it to jamal.
>once the companies all leave and jamal has a few extra digits in his bank account our economy will soar
>for muh free sheeeit nigga
Tacking "nationalism" onto communism doesn't make it any better faggot
>>70006270
This is intersting. Would a cycle of growth maximising and revenue maximising be hte perfect scenario?
>>70006678
Exactly. The demand isn't for a specific item, demand is felt for principles, such as convenience, efficiency, aesthetics, social status, etc. So while a certain item may not be explicitly demanded, when it is suddenly supplied and it sells well it is because it is meeting the demand that exists for one of the aforementioned principles.
>>70006275
Demand does motivate you, yes.
But I'm saying that supply must happen FIRST before you have the ability to demand goods and services in any meaningful sense.
>>70006324
Demand doesn't drive innovation, but expectation of demand, undertaken by suppliers does.
Innovation happens when firms decide to supply an innovative product to the market. Consumers did not ask for an iPhone and then tell Apple to produce it.
You can only say people demand regardless of supply in the absolute abstract (consumers want better goods, consumers want goods that make their life easier, etc.), because goods that do in fact supply those things only exist because some firm has chosen to supply them.
And of course the supply of labour is a supply-side issue. It is in the name.
>>70006880
no, since the laffer curve is highly theoretical and unscientific
>>70006768
Progressive taxes make up for the abuse that is possible in the system. Rich people have more opportunities. Hell, they can make money with money alone. Eventually, they sabotage the free market. Absolute capitalism is NOT a free market.
>>70004181
Came here to say this. Thread should have / here.
>>70003799
Trickle down economics doesn't exist, it's a strawman. Kill yourself famiry
>>70006520
>>70006080
Isn't the income tax rate in Dubai zero? Isn't that why that one shitty racist British comic moved there?
Such a shame to see /pol has fallen for supply-side economics and the globalist memes. :/
lolbertarians are a plague
>>70006919
Demand is desire itself, not the communication of desire, like you seem to think.
>>70006913
>>70007123
>demand is felt for principles, such as convenience, efficiency, aesthetics, social status
This is what I am trying to say. Supply couldn't exist in the first place without demand. They're co-dependent.
But logically, specific products need to be supplied first before people can demand them. And if people haven't supplied some form of good or service themeselves (in the form of labour most commonly), they have no way to demand goods.
This is what you keep missing. You actually have to be able to pay for the things that you demand in the first place to demand them.
Do you include on a demand curve at every price everyone who would want a good or service? No, because that would make the demand curve vertical.
>>70003799
>cutting taxes for everyone is "trickle down economics"
Why are liberals so dumb?
>>70007102
Lolbertarians are just rich white kids who want to smoke weed.
>>70004357
"Stop them from leaving" sounds nice in theory, but in practice it would be very ugly.
>>70006578
>when these same people look at this EXACT process play out on the market, they are outraged
That's because nobody is 2000 times more effective at adding value than the average. They are this effective at gaining money, but most of the rich don't do value-added work.
>>70007450
>This is what I'm trying to say
Whoops, I haven't actually mentioned that supply and demand are co-dependent before. Sorry.
>>70006706
>The result is similar, yes.
Similar yes. If I stole $1000 from you or you spent $1000 on something, the result would be similar.
>If a society invests in its citizen, it's a problem if they just leave.
Taking money from society, then giving it back to them is not investing in them. This argument is even worse when the type of people we're talking about -- wealthy and productive individuals -- already paid far more in taxes than society ever gave back to them.
>>70006449
Vivi in Italia, uno dei paesi che ha una pressione fiscale altissima, dove abbiamo pochissime SPA e siamo contraddisti dalla piccola impresa che non sta andando certo tanto bene visto le migliaia che hanno chiuso in questi anni....e preferisci le tasse alte?
Ma che cazzo ti dice il cervello?
Pensi davvero che voglia andare da un eccesso all'altro? Pensi che esista solo il bianco ed il nero o che io pensi così?
Ho riportati dei dati empirici (presi da un ottimo libro di Thomas Sowell economista inglese chiamato "Basic Economics")
E tutto quello che sai dire è che sono ritardato.
Stai chiamando John Maynard Keynes un ritardato, un grande dell'economia come fu Adam Smith.
Pensi alzando le tasse la gente sarebbe portata a fare più investimenti? Guarda quanto è ricca l'Italia infatti eh.
>>70006270
This is interesting
>>70007450
Okay you're actually right, i'm not versed in economics but I just looked it up. I was semantically mistaken, the concept of demand in economic parlance refers to demand for a specific item and the ability to attain it. Thanks for the interesting discussion.
>>70007017
"Freedom" doesn't just mean "freedom for one group."
"Freedom" can mean "freedom for the citizenry from oligarchy."
I like this freedom.
Fuck turning a blind eye to the needs of the many and defining "freedom" as "whatever is best for the powerful at the time."
>>70007649
>This argument is even worse when the type of people we're talking about -- wealthy and productive individuals -- already paid far more in taxes than society ever gave back to them.
Yeah because sitting behind a big desk, puffing a cigar and letting the millions slide in as others do the actual hard work is sooooo hard.
>>70004357
Thank you based Trumpdaddy
>>70003799
Not in an economy that is anti-business. Rich people don't trickle down shit if they market is poor or outright hostile against them.
>>70004181
"I shouldn't have to reinvest in the system that made my wealth possible, boo fucking hoo."
Conservatantrum discarded.
>>70008062
Yes because the government creates wealth. Good one Bernie.
>>70007985
are you trolling me? you're doing a good fucking job if you are lad
Someone explain Economics to me like I am 5 years old
>>70007985
>I work 80 hour weeks at McDonalds, why am I not appreciated?
But regardless, the argument "we paid for your education therefore we have a right to half your shit if you leave the country" makes no sense when the person in question has paid enough taxes to pay for their education a thousand times over, they were forced to take part in that education, and the price of that education was set at whatever the government felt like.
>>70008062
>Keeping more of your own money is redistribution
>the government creates wealth
>YOU DIDN'T BUILD THAT
Liberals not even once
>>70003799
>tax the rich
To do what? Give the money to the government to waste on useless shit and crash the economy?
>>70008208
"Use common sense and if anyone tells you something about economics that a five-year-old couldn't understand they are probably wrong or lying"
>>70007955
I'm glad you enjoyed it! The semantic does make a lot of difference though.
I enjoyed the debate, as you've been honest and straightforward. Thanks anon.
If you want to read some basic economic theory from a supply-side perspective, Steve Kates' book is a good start. He's also an Australian, coincidentally.
Here's a link to his book at my uni's store (he actually teaches here too):
http://www.campusstore.rmit.edu.au/products/9781782547969
I think it's the best price for it too.
>>70008349
https://thehornnews.com/criminal-welfare-dems-pay-convicts-to-stay-out-of-jail/
>hurr durr da rich are evil gobernment did nuffin wrong
Fuck off with this shit. Tax rate should be 30% at best
>>70007774
>Guarda quanto è ricca l'Italia infatti eh.
L'italia ha il terzo pil dell'europa occidentale continentale e per la ricchezza media delle famiglie.
http://www.voxeu.org/article/are-germans-really-poorer-spaniards-italians-and-greeks
La vogliamo finire di raccontrate stronzate? Scommetto che hai votato fare per fermare il declino e credevi davvero che giannino aveva lauree e master negli stati uniti, mentecatto.
>>70008182
>Strawman: The Post, or How I learned to Stop Reading and Love Discarding Your Reply
>>70008208
I don't have the list here, we do have the board thought biz, anyway Basic Economics is a good start, you could look up also the pioneers like Adam Smith, keeping in mind that is like with Newton Gravity laws and Einstein, Adam has a lot of things right but not everything and things can be and have been polished.
>>70008208
Economics is counter intuative. If anyone says "let me break it down for you", then says a Nations finances are like a credit card... punch them in the face straight away.
Remember, it is NOT possible for a country with their own Central Bank to become bankrupt. It is impossible. All national "debt" can be paid off, or writen off, at the stroke of a pen, without costing the taxpayer a cent.
A nations "debt" is not the same as an individual's debt.
>>70007985
I make $480k, physician. Paid ~40% of that in federal, state and local taxes. Work nights, weekends, holidays, average ~60h / week.
> Probably won't get social security that I paid in
> Don't get more police protection, more fire protection
> Don't have kids so I'm subsidizing school for others
> Don't use the roads more, etc etc
I don't dispute that there are people who don't pay their "fair share" at all levels of society, the fact of the matter is the burden falls on people like me down through the middle class.
Under Bernie, my tax burden goes up another $75k... if that were to happen, they're going to have to put a gun to my head to force me to keep working this hard. I'm already at the point of saying fuck it - and most of my colleagues feel the same way. I'll go back to free college, get a faggot liberal arts degree (and destroy the curve in the process) and let the Bernie faggots take care of me for a change.
>>70003799
Of course pol believes it. pol basically works for the Jew.
>>70004005
Yes, but that doesn't mean that you can't tax them more but not to such an punitive extent that they leave.
And capital flight exists entirely because of a set of malleable laws.
>>70008316
>Strawman: The Post, or How I learned to Stop Reading and Love Discarding Your Reply
>>70008443
>>70008643
>>70008680
I still don't understand Economics thanks guys
>>70007012
It's common sense. If you tax at 0% you make nothing, and if you tax at 100% you make nothing. The reasons are obvious. And just as obvious is the fact that somewhere in between is an optimal tax level. What I don't get is how someone actually got something so simple named after themselves.
>>70007955
>the concept of demand in economic parlance refers to demand for a specific item and the ability to attain it
Willingness to attain is a better way of thinking of it. For a lot of simple goods, people will make their own if it costs too much.
>>70004005
When South Korea was developing, capital flight warranted a capital punishment. That would be a good start. Frankly, it's terrorism so maybe take out their families too.
>>70008680
> All national "debt" can be paid off, or writen off, at the stroke of a pen, without costing the taxpayer a cent
How come the Greek government is tanking under debt pressure then? If governments were to write away all of their debt, future investors in currency would never even touch it.
>>70008680
>without costing the taxpayer a cent.
I'm laffin' m8. Bakunin of all people wouldn't argue the merits of the central bank.
>>70008680
So what happens to people who hold treasury bonds, etc as part of their retirement?
How are all these countries (notably China) going to take having what's owed them with a stroke of a pen?
>>70003799
>hoard shekels
someone doesn't know how money works.
protip: if you stick your money under the mattress and keep it out of the economy, the inflationary jew steals it.
>>70009037
>How come the Greek government is tanking under debt
Greece doesn't have a Central Bank, you silly cunt.
>>70008470
I will definitely add that book to my list - I've got a bunch of economics ones in there, I plan to put myself through a sort of crash course when I have some time.
So just to get it straight, you'd say it goes
Basic Human Desire -----> Supply -> Demand
So the hunter desires to eat. He is able bodied and fit, so he has a supply of labour. This means that the game in the woods is now 'demanded' because he can potentially use his labour to acquire them?
Let them leave.
It shouldnt cost $100,000 to open a sandwich shop here. It shouldnt cost you $200,000 to open your own taxi service.
America is not free any longer. The rich have rewritten our legislation so it benefits the rich first.
>>70009063
>So what happens to people who hold treasury bonds,
They are paid in full.
>>70008946
>and if you tax at 100% you make nothing.
Well this isn't entirely true. At 100% tax rate you could potentially make a fortune in used bullets.
>>70008208
The study of the allocation of scarce resources which have alternative uses.
For example timber. Timber is scarce because there are only so many trees in the world. Timber also has alternative uses, it can be used to make toys, building material, furniture, etc.
>>70009182
Since when are bonds not considered as part of gov't debt? Or are you saying the gov't would not wipe out bond holder debt?
Ask people in Detroit how well that worked for them...
>>70008543
Non hai indirizzato il mio punto precedente mi ha solo chiamato ritardato.
Ma se sono anni che ogni estate si parla di quanti pochi italiani viaggino di come l'anno scorso avessero cominciato a risparmiare sul cibo,
Vediamo cosa dice l'ISTAT
http://www.askanews.it/top-10/l-istat-dice-che-l-economia-italiana-e-in-decisa-decelerazione_711777213.htm
Per fortuna la deflazione vuol dire più potere d'acquisto, fino a che non diventa un problema però per le imprese, soprattutto quelle piccole.
http://gds.it/2016/04/05/gli-italiani-tornano-a-spendere-sangalli-ma-bisogna-abbassare-le-tasse_496174/
il Pil ci può dire la ricchezza di un paese ma non il suo vero benessere, basta chiederlo alla Cina, palazzi fatti per durare 30-40 nubi di smog che rischiano di importarci con il vento, operai che gli hanno dovuto mettere le reti per evitare ulteriori suicidi.
Potremmo stare molto meglio.
All these poorfags saying:
>not paying gibs me dats = terrorism
When did we turn into r/bernie again?
>>70009157
>We're still fucked, but at least the rich are gone.
>>70004357
rip fundamental pillar of western law
>>70009132
Read the rest of my reply, goober. Even if they did have a central bank, the Greek government in its situation would never be able to obtain loans because investors would assume that they'd just cancel them again when things looked bad.
I'm no central bank advocate, but you just went full blown retarded.
>>70008680
Most people are Economic illiterates..
They don't know the difference between the Current Account Deficit and National Debt.
That's why nobody in America flinches when Donald Trump says "We're loosing to China and Japan in trade" and then references the Trade deficit number..
As if that was an indicator of the terms of trade.
>>70008841
Come on now, is not easy, that's like asking explain medicine to me or law or physics or mathematics, how would you even go about doing that in a minute, you can't just learn stuff from the get go, you think degrees, books are some kind of scam?
>>70009469
All these conservatantrums saying:
>paying taxes = terrorism
When did we turn into r/butthurt again?
>>70009420
>Potremmo stare molto meglio.
Italy is a g7 country with among the highest standards of living in the world, literally billions and billions of people leave worse.
Some people like you likeros to complain just because.
>>70009635
But its still bad governance to acquire debt while you spend frivolously, because you're putting the interest repayments onto the next generation who had no say in the original decision.
>>70008968
>capital flight [...] Frankly, it's terrorism
...
>>70008946
yes but the curve of the laffer curve is the most important part, if its tilted to the right, low taxes are good, if its tilted to the left, you can potentially tax more without losing substantial revenue.
>>70003799
I don't "believe in trickle down economics", supply side economics works though.
>>70009635
that's how you know trump is just shilling the elections like they do every election cycle
>>70009148
It makes it easier to understand when you have at least two parties.
A primitive man sees another primitive man who's picked some berries. He wants to eat some of them, but has no means to demand them, so he goes and chips some flint into a tool. He then is able to demand the berries at an appropriate cost because he can trade his tool for the berries.
If the first man hadn't made his tool, he wouldn't have been able to demand the berries in any meaningful way as he had no product of his own supply.
Frankly I don't give a fuck if the rich leave. We need to stop fellating the rich at every possible opportunity. They are just human like you and me, and can be replaced.
Fuck the rich. They are destroying this country.
>>70009997
Or is he just putting the real issue of the trade deficit in a way that the lowest common denominator can understand?
>>70004005
>rich cunt doesn't pay taxes
>gets forced to pay taxes
>oy vey this is anudda shoa oim leaving!
>WOW GOOD JOB YOU MADE THEM LEAVE, NOW THEY WONT PAY TAXES!
But if they were never paying taxes in the first place, what does it matter?
>>70003799
Yes, let's place our trust in some socialist economist.
Trickle down worked.
>>70010048
I got you man, that a is much more intuitive example.
>>70003799
Check this out, some shithead OP posted a quote by this Marxist fuckhead again.
LOL OP awesome joke you should become a comedian. Maybe if your teeth are even more messed up then that Oliver degenerate you'll be successful.
>>70010096
>Frankly I don't give a fuck if the rich leave.
Cant wait for europe to be world's superpower senpai
>>70003799
Question, how did they deal with capital flight in Fascist Italy and Nat Soc Germany?
>>70006270
What if you eliminate tax on capital all together? Won't businesses and multinationals flock to the country and make more money in the long term?
>>70009743
Nobody is claiming that. What people are saying is that its bullshit to lose 25% or more of your income so the government can spend it on retarded shit.
Why am I responsible for paying to support some slut and her bastard offspring, or dumbass boomers who didnt save a dime during their careers?
>>70007102
Fuck off pinko.
>>70010303
So anarcho-capitalism?
True, Communism is the only solution. Kill the rich! Kill Sigmundur DavÃð and other rich politicians!
>>70010219
>Trickle down worked.
>>70009929
>supply side economics works though
http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/15/news/economy/trickle-down-theory-wrong-imf/
>>70010330
>Why am I responsible for paying to support some slut and her bastard offspring, or dumbass boomers who didnt save a dime during their careers?
You are responsible because it is your destiny in life to be treated like a slave and your income is merely a tool for your slave masters to re-distribute in order to feel better about themselves.
>>70010303
This is taxation as a whole I'm pretty sure, not just business taxation. People won't come to your country if you don't bring in any tax revenue, because how can you maintain property rights with a non-funded government.
>>70010330
Not to mention the fact that the government borrows shitloads of money while it spends frivolously, so not only are you paying taxes for bullshit, you're paying interest on debt that was taken on before you were born and spend on war and gibs.
>>70010390
What? No, just eliminate the taxation on companies and expect part of that money to be collected in income tax from all the people working in those companies and the rest.
>>70004701
You are a fucking retard.
It's their money.
It's not your money.
It's not governments money.
Their money.
>>70004357
what is this, North Korea or something
>>70010521
I meant business tax or whatever you call it.
>>70009596
The Greeks could be out of "debt" tomorrow, if there was the political will. Without costing the Greek taxpayer a single Drachma.
Watch this guys. Do you think that Steve Jobs thought of the Iphone due to consumer demand?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hK6q67u2Py4
>>70010658
Without a government enforcing property rights, they have ZERO money. Fuck off, you corporate whore.
>>70010583
What about overseas companies that make heaps on money in your country but have very little staff working there to collect income from?
>>70010464
Capital flight is very real these days.
Since capital in first world countries is digitised and available all around the world, and with the globalisation of the money market, if you make it hard to produce in your country, companies can move much easier than 80 years ago.
Watch and listen to Uncle Milton Supply side deniers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTLwANVtnkA
>>70009776
>Some people like you likeros to complain just because.
Imagine this, you have this nice idea for public golf courses, not those bullshit clubs with tons of fees that require you to know a member and you need to wait months for it, something cheap that will attract tourists too, that will re-evaluate places that have been left unused and require next to no permissions due to being considered garden works, let's say you even have a kind of seeds that let you not waste precious water unlike so many other golf courses.
So you go to the city hall, only to hear that they have no money and to find out months later that they did, they just preferred to give them to Mafia and this is just one of the many shit that just makes you give up on the burocracy of this shit-hole full of incompetent assholes.
>>70010735
They would get buttfucked if they did this. Being Merkel's bitch is the lesser of two evils.
>>70010773
poor commie faggot, i get more money than you and i live in the third world, how does that even feel you miserable dirt licking slug
>>70010684
Business taxation is a load of shit in the first place. When you tax corporations, the lowest employees bare the brunt of the taxes in wage reductions.
It is more honest and fair to tax individuals' income, since it is more transparent.
>>70010735
Oh of course they can, but governments almost never do this due to the ridiculous economic repercussions of the decision.
>>70010773
They paid for the police and courts with their taxes already though. Just because you are doing better within the system that someone else does not mean you are more indebted to it than them.
>>70010751
I used to follow Schiff a lot. He's a bit of a moron these days. His bank doesn't make much money.
He deserves massive kudos though for calling the mortgage crisis and aftermath in 2006 while everyone laughed in his fucking face.
>>70010821
I would hope the absence of taxation on business would incentive them to move here and ship their bases of operations here, but you make a good point.
>>70010299
>>70010765
>>70010464
Also It wasn't as easy to move money around back then as it is now. No de facto currency as the burguerbuck nor digital transactions.
Now you can enter a room with a briefcase with cash and have it's worth deposited in an account the other side of the world for a small percentage, and all this isn't even using bitcoins.
We live in a merchant world.
Isnt it fucked that you can privately own a oil company?
Isnt that the natural resources of the earths, not just one persons.
Can I just start bottling water and selling it?
Theres so much broken shit in the world. If i were to use the broken system, it would become an abbomination in my hands, and im a really good person. Imagine this shit in some dirty faggots hands.
The world is fucked, we need to publicly hang some of these demons taking advantage of all. Other counties do it.
>>70011163
So you agree with me? Because I think taxing businesses is simply taxing consumers. I don't think it's wrong to assume a business owner will simply pass the new costs to the consumer by bumping the price of the product.
>>70011208
Smart people, and this includes corporations, will always take the path of least resistance, so unless your tax system is watertight, people abuse it.
>>70009825
>But its still bad governance to acquire debt while you spend frivolously, because you're putting the interest repayments onto the next generation who had no say in the original decision.
American debt is sound debt, because it is a country of the rule of law. American debt is secure debt because it is a stable democracy.
So a country like China wants to invest in a system that will still be around in 50 years.
Can't say that about many other countries in the world.
>>70010106
>Or is he just putting the real issue of the trade deficit in a way that the lowest common denominator can understand?
No, he playing on their ignorance of economics and trade, to suit his election agenda. ie use the fear of something irreverent (CAD), to manipulate voter attention towards him.
>>70011312
So you think "natural resources" should be owned by everyone?
>>70011312
>Isnt that the natural resources of the earths, not just one persons.
Isn;t it fucked that you can buy gas at the pump. You are one person! You should share that gas with everyone!!
>Can I just start bottling water and selling it?
It's a billion dollar industry. What's the problem? You've probably bought a few of them and it was convenient to you at the time.
>>70010048
>>70010237
>A primitive man sees another primitive man who's picked some berries. He wants to eat some of them, but has no means to demand them, so he goes and chips some flint into a tool. He then is able to demand the berries at an appropriate cost because he can trade his tool for the berries.
Man of the hook nosed tribe witnesses this and fences in all of the berry bushes. He sells berries for flint and uses the flint to make weapons. With these soldiers behind him be claims the art of berry picking to be his "intellectual property" and he takes any proceeds from other berry pickers.
The primitive example really does reveal a lot.
>>70007622
If your company had 1,000 programmers and came up with a miracle innovation that made them all 33% more efficient, how much value would you add to your company?
These are the kinds of massive-impact decisions CEOs frequently make. Where even a 1% difference in productivity can mean tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
Sure, the CEO may not be the genius behind innovations, but he has the difficult task of determining which of them will achieve success for his company.
>>70011312
Not sure if you're trolling, but you need to expend labour to collect oil. You also need to buy bottles and fill them and distribute them etc to sell bottled water. If you want some ]free' water, go to a spring and start drinking from it, or open your mouth in the rain, although these still require you to expend labour.
>>70011416
>taxing businesses is simply taxing consumers
Nope. If you're supplying a product, generally you will sell to more people than the number of people you employ.
Therefore, businesses prefer to hire less and give less raises to a smaller number of people (to make their labour less competitive) rather than making their products more expensive to a larger number of people.
It is better to remain competitive in the final goods and services market than in the demand for labour market.
Sure, when corporations pay higher tax they will pass the costs onto consumers, but they will try to cut costs inside their organisation first. This usally means that the most unskilled, poorest workers (which are in heavy supply) get hit the hardest.
>>70005819
The iPhone was only a mix of a mp3 player and a PDA, at first.
They ditch the penshit and make it possible to use directly with your finger. That was the innovation.
You just fall for apple's marketing of being so innovative. When they just improve something already existing, with good marketing
At best, they sell things that are a little better at doing what others' product already do, with some style and for far more money, but with a lot of flaws others thought people could not accept.
>>70010303
we don´t have any corporate taxes, but we have social taxes (33%)
>>70011517
I get that its good for China, but I'm saying that it is bad governance for the US to take on loans which they then waste on frivolities or lose to corruption. The US taxpayer has to pay those debts back, with interest, so you're putting debt on the backs of people who aren't even alive, so you can throw money at programs like this:
https://thehornnews.com/criminal-welfare-dems-pay-convicts-to-stay-out-of-jail/
This is not a theoretical argument. We have economic history to give us the answer.
The fact is the policies of the right produce prosperity, the policies of the left produce destruction, every time.
>>70011583
Yes, crony capitalism is bad.
>>70012132
>https://thehornnews.com/criminal-welfare-dems-pay-convicts-to-stay-out-of-jail/
Paying criminals to stay out of jail is more effective and also cheaper. You're a moron.
>thehornnews.com
You people seriously need to stop listening to your shitty, biased "alternative news" sites.
>>70011597
>If your company had 1,000 programmers and came up with a miracle innovation that made them all 33% more efficient, how much value would you add to your company?
My college education is telling me it's some share of that 33%, but my experience in corporate America is telling me it's 66%: 33% your innovation and also 33% for the implementation.
>>70011597
>Sure, the CEO may not be the genius behind innovations, but he has the difficult task of determining which of them will achieve success for his company.
And when there aren't any innovations to be made it's his job to do a stock buyback and pretend he's important.
>>70011982
I'm not saying that iPhones are a great product or anything. I mean I'd never own one.
Even if you look at Apple in the most shallow way, the fact that Apple could design such a nice looking product (in popular opinion at least) meant that they made some innovation in popular design.
Nice picture, OP.
Had a great fap, but I forgot that I had to buy TP.
Now my jizz is trickling down my shaft. Will this trickle-down cuckonomy work?
Also, nice Trinilad and Tobaggot flag.
>>70004005
That's the problem with common markets, race to the bottom.
>>70011517
>American debt is secure debt because it is a stable democracy.
America defaulted in the 70's. The bank bailout sort of amounts to a default of sorts too.
America's debt is secure for now, but it could default overnight. If there was any kind of crisis that causes bond yield to rise, america would immediately default more or less. They only need to rise by 3-4% to use up half of the US tax base.
>>70012261
It was discussed on mainstream media not long ago, I just googled it and brought up the first link. Its an absurd example in order to emphasise a point. Governments waste immense amounts of money.
>>70004005
>I'm sorry richfriend, but there is a 85% processing fee on all monies exiting the country
>>70004119
Its not a phrase used to describe themselves just one that's extremely fit, like cultural Marxism, at best its laissez faire economics.
>>70012444
>absurd example
Considering the program WORKS and saves money compared to incarceration, I would say it's not absurd at all.
>Waste immense amounts of money
Tell me how a program that reduces crime AND costs less than incarceration is an "immense waste of money"
Trickle-down Economics is horseshit.
But tax cuts for the rich are not necessarily horseshit.
First of all, I'm not rich, so I'm not speaking for the rich here. HOWEVER, it is logical that if a person is ultra-wealthy, he has choices about which country he is going to live in.
This was most publicly noticeable during the 60's, when so many of the platinum-selling British Invasion bands became tax exiles from GB. Why should they stay in a country that's taking 90% of their money when they can simply move away and keep the money?
Same applies in current times and to the current crop of rich folk. They don't have to stay in the USA. They can leave, and there are PLENTY of places that will be happy to receive them. Tax them enough, and they will do just that.
So there's a point to tax cuts for the rich that transcends the "paying your fair share" paradigm that most people judge by.
If we want to keep the American ultra-wealthy in America - and of course we do - we have to account for their other options, and provide a competitive tax atmosphere for them.
It sucks, but it has to be done. I've learned to accept it.
>>70012451
Easier said than done. China try to do the exact same thing, but there's a million ways for the rich to get their money out.
>>70003799
You don't n need s degree in economics to know trickle down is bullshit
>>70012583
You're a cuck.
>If we want to keep the American ultra-wealthy in America - and of course we do
These aren't magical superbeings who are capable of producing wealth that we could only dream of. These people got to where they are based on a combination of luck, timing, and maybe a little skill/ingenuity. They can be replaced by anyone and we would be better off for it.
Let them leave.
>>70007616
You can make it very hard for the wealth to leave. Fiat isn't wealth, not even gold is wealth. The wealth of a nation is it's natural resources, productive capital and human capital. The rich make up an insignificant part of the latter (entrepreneurs are important, but the hungry poor ones much more than the fat cat ones).
To keep wealth in the nation you can use capital controls, you can disallow foreigners to own real estate or equity etc. All the lovely stuff "free trade" agreements are trying to outlaw (they are actually globalist capital protection agreements).
>>70012526
This is beside the point, have your nigger allowance if you must. Governments spend frivolously.
>>70012791
>They can be replaced by anyone and we would be better off for it.
Only in your case you communist cuck.
>>70010521
You tax poorfags exclusively. They're not real people, like corporations.
>>70003799
Trickle down only works in socialist societies. Capitalist societies you gotta work for it.
>>70012897
>Communist
Do you even know what that word means? I'm not a communist because I want the cancer that is killing America to leave.
>>70012791
>You're a cuck.
And you, my friend, are borderline retarded. Probably functional with a little help from your family.
>Let them leave.
...and take their money with them.
It's April already pal. You should be almost through with Economics 101 by now.
Still, you might consider a summer course too.
>>70012583
And that's exactly why you need GLOBAL institutions and laws that prevent the super-mega rich from tax evasion.
>inb4 NWO
This would specifically get people like Soros. But even with these global institutions and laws, the crooked tax lawyers for these multi billionairs would find a way around. But that's not an argument against them, but to start the war of law.
>>70013012
It means that you're a Communist, Communist.
Now go prep the bull, cuck, because cucks are cucked because they're replaceable, just like you.
>>70013053
>Economics 101
Anon, I know ECON 101 is the extent of your knowledge on the subject, but it's embarrassing to have you trying to brag about your ignorance on 4chan.
>>70012583
The ultra-rich aren't important for the success of a nation, the high IQ well educated population looking to become rich provide the lifeblood of an economy.
Of course because of the European Muslim invasion the US will continue to get the cream of the crop in that respect.
>>70013075
>And that's exactly why you need GLOBAL institutions and laws that prevent the super-mega rich from tax evasion.
Do Germans have a reflexive conquer-the-world gene?
I thought we killed off all of those people in the 20th century.
>>70013156
>I know you are but what am I
underage and b&
>>70005248
Now lets see it broken down by race
>>70013176
>the high IQ well educated population looking to become rich provide the lifeblood of an economy
Yeah and where do they get their capital to start their businesses?
Fuck off Eurofailure, you don't get to lecture anyone on how Capitalism works.
>>70013176
Exactly. The problem is that by punishing success, you lower the incentive to take the risks and make the sacrifices that success requires.
>>70012583
And the consequences of them taking their wealth elsewhere is... what, again?
>>70013275
That's not even what I'm saying. It's clear that the people who say "muh ECON101" know nothing about economics beyond the most basic of concepts. Yet that insist on running their mouths as if they're experts.
The real world doesn't work that way. Believe it or not, real-world economics is decided in scholarly research, not a basic economics course meant for 18 year old undergrads.
>>70012266
>My college education...
Missing the point. Value can be a multiplier instead of discrete.
>>70012266
>And when there aren't any innovations to be made
Unlikely, but sure. Let's say there are no innovations even currently theoretically possible at FantasyCorp right now. The potential to fuck up and screw millions of people out of their money is still there.
The going rates of babysitting/day care can be quite high in some areas, sometimes even $15+ an hour. Why is it priced like this? Not because this job is difficult or requires a great deal of proficiency, but because the consequences of failure are so incredibly scary: literally your child's life could potentially be in jeopardy.
Now imagine there was an incredibly time-consuming and stressful job that had the most immense consequences for failure possible, with millions of people having staked their well-being on your performance, that required a great deal of industry specific, and often times multi-industry specific, knowledge and an understanding of how large-scale policy decisions could affect operations spanning up to internationally, and on top of this criteria you are required to be an incredibly negotiator, salesman, and representative for your corporation.
I assume next up is your fairy tale delusion that you can run a Fortune500 company as well as anyone that currently does it?
If you actually believe this, please grow up.
>>70013427
>real-world economics is decided in scholarly research
ROFL
Nope.
Now fuck off replaceable cuck.
>>70013427
It's literally what you said m8. You can at least accept that much.
>It's clear that the people who say "muh ECON101" know nothing about economics beyond the most basic of concepts.
Nice opinion. It was a simple insult m8. Grow some balls.
>>70013053
Yes, let the traitors take their dirty money elsewhere. But not before we the people exact the back taxes we are owed.
No more of this corporate inversion bullshit. No more tax havens. No more loopholes.
If you are a patriot, you pay taxes and contribute to the growth of America. If you are not with us, you are against us.
Corporations and wealthy individuals who manipulate the system in such ways as to screw the lives of the working class ought to be classified as terrorists and waterboarded until they change their fucking tune.
>>70013562
>Nope
Sorry, but you're wrong. Tell me about your background in economics. Where did you get your degree? What do you do for work?
I realize that, in the real world, EVERYBODY thinks they're an expert on economics. But the research is what matters, not your personal opinion based on a limited understanding of economic principles. The fact that so many people don't understand this is how memes like supply-side economics get into public policy.
>>70012590
>Ireland
Post discarded. Ireland is a "tax haven" country too.
>>70013343
The fact that you need large amounts of capital to start a business is a problem, though.
>>70013075
You can hide wealth within a nation. It's currently very easy to hide wealth internationally, but that doesn't mean there aren't other ways. Globalism is not the solution to the problem of globalism.
>>70013719
National sovereignty means that individual nations can set their own tax rates.
That means that socialism of the type that you're clearly in favor of just isn't attractive to people who can leave and take the assets they earned with them.
>>70013835
your point?
>>70013631
It's not an opinion. It's a fact. Only dishonest ideologues and people with a limited understanding of real-world economics come in here with their "muh ECON101" bullshit. Which one are you?
>>70013719
Sorry, I don't believe the government has the right to rob me and then tell me I should be grateful. Each shit you bootlicking statist fuck and move to Cuba if you want to live in a country where the government is allowed to enforce the equality you crave so much
>>70010658
Yeah it's their money... that they exploited the working class to get
Inb4 go back to le reddit shill hehe
>>70012791
>>70013176
>>70013414
>Let them leave
There goes our jobs.
Why stop there? Let's actively find the rich, intelligent people and throw them out the country before they make the decision themselves.
Fuck em. We don't need smart people that know how to run businesses and create jobs.
>>70004005
Yeah but Holland increased it to 75% which was retarded and there are ways to set up tax laws so that they can fuck off all they want but their money is still taxed where its earned, but what can you expect from a retard who /threads his own post?
>>70003799
>Allowing people to keep more of what they have.
>upwards distribution
I thought Chinese niggas were supposed to have a brain. This must be why their society stagnated for so long.
all taxing rich people does is decrease investment and charitable contributions.
We need people with money, either lending or building industries with their own money, increasing production and generally raising the standard of living.
>>70013918
>rich
>intelligent
Two different things, cuck. Two very different things.
>>70013888
>Everyone who insults my knowledge of economics is stupid. This is a fact
Can't wait for the next economic crash, and these butter soft bernie supports can die off.
>>70013915
>exploited
Please, tell about how they put a gun to someone's head and forced them to work
>>70013759
>Sorry, but you're wrong
Keep crying cuck.
Your ideas just aren't standing up to scrutiny butt-boy.
> But the research is what matters
Nope, reality is what matters. You slack jawed low-test faggot.
>>70004005
That's why they should be taxed EVERYWHERE, or atleast in the first world. If they move to some african shithole, maybe the place will actually improve as they don't wanna live in one.
>>70008689
40% tax? Bloody hell, see an accountant mate, you could cut that down by at least half
>>70013888
Nope, it's the opinion of a low-test faggot, (YOU) who can't back up their ideas and are now folding faster than the piece of piss-soaked cardboard that you live under.
>>70014008
Not stupid, ignorant/uneducated. Or intellectually dishonest, with a clear ideological agenda. Pick one.
>>70014084
The research IS reality. The research shows us what happens, in reality, when economic policy changes. That's why it matters. Not my problem if you don't understand that.
>>70013915
I can tell you have never been associated with nor ran a business in your life. In the free market nobody is being exploited. You're working for your employer voluntarily, it is not being done with force. The only entity that can legally exploit someone is the government with their monopoly on legal theft. You're clueless.
>>70013176
>>70013414
>And the consequences of them taking their wealth elsewhere is... what, again?
What's wrong with you people? Are you seriously just buck ignorant? Why are you on /pol/, isn't there some kind of minimum knowledge requirement around here?
This isn't rocket science, guys, but let me create a scenario for you.
Let's just say that the USA decided to jack up taxes on the rich, to a very high level, an unprecedented level - and they ALL decided to leave for Australia.
The current U.S. GDP is around $17 trillion. 24% of that GDP belongs to the ultra-wealthy - around $4.5 trillion.
The current Australian GDP is around $1.5 trillion.
So suddenly, with one stroke of a pen, a few phone calls to moving companies, and the purchase of some airplane tickets, the USA's GDP just became $12.5 trillion, and Australia's just became $6 trillion.
Now, Australia's economy is half the size of America's, whereas before, it was less than 10% as large. We've just created a new superpower.
This is an extreme example, but the paradigm holds true on any scale - every dollar that leaves this country and goes to another country weakens America and strengthens the country it went to.
Now, you guys that just...don't understand stuff - please stop posting and lurk moar.
>>70013996
>Two different things, cuck. Two very different things
Keep telling yourself that, it might even make you feel better about being poor due to your lack of knowledge about how economies actually operate.
>>70006578
This is misleading as fuck, the bottom 50% paying 2% of the taxes is a much higher burden than the top 1% paying 36%
A flat tax rate is the only fair and logical system. If you have 99% of the wealth, you pay 99% of the taxes, that's it.
>>70014267
>The research IS reality.
AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
>government cuts corporate taxes to bring jobs back, lowest in the G7
>employment rate continues to fall
>corporations sitting on over $600 billion they don't want to invest into the country
Hehehe... maybe we should cut taxes more! Hehehe...
>>70008680
yeah it doesn't cost the taxpayer a cent it just makes the currency worth less than the paper its printed on good job anon I don't know why you aren't the head of the British central bank
>trickle down economics does not work!
>they tweet from their increadibly, almost alient tech iphones and computers which cost less than a decent lawnmower we had in the 70's
Trickle don economics doesn't mean you get to be a millionaire and have a vacation house in hawaii for flipping burgers you stupid cucks, it means you get more for what your money is worth. You don't deserve the things you already have. Its insane how Tyrone can flip burgers for 6 hours and go home with a better life than a fucking king in the 1600's, yet still complains because it isn't enough. Well what will be enough? At what point will trickle down economics have worked? Never, because lazy cucks are always going to be buttblasted there's someone wealthier than them.
>>70014194
>>70014341
>Don't believe the scholarly research on the real-world impact of economic policy
>Believe my simplified, meant-for-18-year-old-undergrads ECON101 class instead
Fuck off, retard
>>70014394
wow you sure showed me. Brilliant response, leaf.
>>70008062
"I shouldn't have to do anything and the system should still make it possible for me to be wealthy!"
Commiefag detected.
>>70014394
Empirical evidence trumps theory, every time.
>>70013996
>I did it mom! I said cuck again on the internet!
http://lesswrong.com/lw/jw5/how_much_wealth_is_produced_by_high_iq_people/
Keep fighting for those means of production prole. One day you'll get your fair share.
Tried to post image from >>70005248
but apparently someone beat me to it.
Funny how the evidence doesn't change no matter how many times the same arguments are made.
>>70014460
>Don't believe the scholarly research on the real-world impact of economic policy
Desperate straw man attempt is desperate.
You're a faggot and you're poor, and you will remain poor because you're retarded.
That envy you're feeling towards people who are more successful than you are will eat away at you from the inside out regardless of how many times you tell yourself that you're "more intelligent" then they are.
Live forever fuckboy, because your life, as you have chosen it for yourself is going to give you nothing but perpetual misery.
>>70013915
Yes... good goyim. You've learned well from the schools WE established, the academics WE funded, and the constitution WE wrote.
It's our money. Not yours.
Hehehehehhe.... stupid goy
>>70014653
Exactly.
>>70014769
>ad hom: the post
Thanks for your contribution, leaf. Now fuck off.
>>70013525
First answer was a joke, you asspie. And the trend of buybacks is real. Nobody is investing in the long run.
I've met CEOs and they aren't all Elon Musk. The most effective markets are diverse and competitive markets, which are devoid of Fortune 500 companies and billionaire CEOs. Because markets that efficiently allocate profits to the workers aren't giving one guy 2000 times more than the average.
>>70008062
>I shouldn't have to reinvest in the system that made my wealth possible
But that's exactly how capitalism works. If you become wealthy, and don't reinvest your money. It loses money over life. Every non retarded wealthy person puts their money in a savings bank or in stocks and shit.
>>70013890
>"rob me"
That's the problem with you greedy jew terrorists. You use all the benefits of our society and agreed to live in America where we have a pre-established social contract and a system of laws that included fair structures for collective funding of the government then try to wiggle out of your end and change the deal and stack the deck for yourselves and your jew buddies so that regular joes end up paying for your bullshit. You rob us then claim we're robbing you. Fucking unpatriotic jew banker terrorist.
>>70014308
>This isn't rocket science, guys, but let me create a scenario for you.
Instead you set up a strawman of simplistic schoolyard level analysis.
As it these people are going to take those "trilions" of wealth away in pillowcases and piggy banks.
The wealth you describe is in the CONTEXT of the USA national system. For the wealth to be most valuable, it would have to remain or still be connected to that system.
Or just take it to Ozland, and away from Wall Street, and put it into say, the Chinese Stock Market.
Yeah, that'll show 'em.
>>70015062
>Because markets that efficiently allocate profits to the workers aren't giving one guy 2000 times more than the average.
Unless one guy is producing 2000x more wealth than the average.
>>70003799
There is no "trickle down theory" in economics. It's a popular culture invention.
>>70015190
Nobody produces 2000 more VALUE than the average. Obviously even larger discrepancies exist in wealth, but these are due to market inefficiencies.
>>70014970
It's not ad hominem if it's true. And you know it's true, and that's why you're continuing to contemplate it.
>>70015111
Again, ignorance.
No, that wealth is not in "the context of the USA national system." Wealth is wealth. You can take it anywhere, it travels great.
Also, it's not a question of "showing 'em." The ultra-wealthy are not going to be acting out of malice, it's a simple business decision: "I can stay here and pay 25% taxes, or I can go there and pay 15%." When you're talking about hundreds of millions or billions of dollars, that decision is a no-brainer.
Also, you need to look up the definition of the word "strawman" (among numerous other things you probably should look up).
>>70015449
>Nobody produces 2000 more VALUE than the average.
Of course they can. A talented CEO can be the difference between a company losing a billion dollars in a year and making a billion dollars in a year. He can use and spend the same resources of a lessor CEO and produce something that is worth billions of dollars more. It's not that hard. Infact this is exactly why CEOs often have high salaries, because this is simply the value of their labour. Not because it's "fair", but because it's simply the real word value of it.
>>70015574
You have literally contributed nothing to this discussion the entire time. All you have done is cry "muh econ101" and attack me personally. That's not how you have an adult conversation.
Now fuck off.
>>69999999
Check em
>>70003799
>don't take a rich person's money that is his to begin with
>upward "redistribution" to the rich
This is why I can't take leftists seriously. Like you might think taxing the rich (ie stealing their money with the threat of legal consequences) is justified for some kind of greater good, but they're not somehow stealing food from the mouths of the poor or something by not having their money stolen from them. That's like saying resisting a mugger is upward redistribution of wealth to the person being mugged. The mental gymnastics of the left are astounding.
>>70015111
You do realize you fucking retard, that things like tax rates affect the value of wealth right?
No one is going to want stock in a country where every transaction suffers a tax penalty or own property in a country where the property tax is 50%.
Shit like this will drop the value of a currency like a cement brick into water
>>69999999
Le meme post
>>70003799
Yeah, I'm not trusting a Chink, since they're all commies.
>>70015732
>All you have done is cry "muh econ101"
Nope that wasn't me you cuck.
Can't even keep your anons straight when they're right here on your screen. You're a disaster and you should be ashamed of yourself.
>>70015449
Multiplier vs discreet value
You said you were joking in a previous post, yet you do not seem to grasp this simple idea.
>>70015817
It's just communism but they can't sell that idea anymore so they have to desperately call it something else.
Ha-Joon Chang is a failure and when his ideas are revealed for what they are leftists go apeshit. I've seen this happen myself.
>>70007622
>Investing money is not added value work
>I am projecting this hard
Your quip "but most of the rich don't do value-added work" is adorable.
>>70016187
>Multiplier vs discrete value
How does that affect what i said?
>You said you were joking in a previous post
I never said I was joking.
>>70015714
This is just flowery language that misses the point I was making. If there is a company that controls enough of a market that a CEO is making billion dollar decisions, that MARKET is inefficient. The company probably loves the guy, but overall he's benefiting from a MARKET inefficiency. The overall value of the market would be higher it were composed of smaller firms.
>>70016100
>leaf
You're all the same to me, canacuck.
>>70010450
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpKvS7S1GY
being this much of an economically illiterate retard
>>70016187
>Multiplier vs discreet value
That was a typo, I just forgot the "x"
>>70016352
>usury is value added work
Good goy
>>70004357
HEY FRIEND. That sounds like fascism! I'm all for occupying a piece of land peacefully since boarders are social constructs. But as soon as you try to actually make these people accountable? No way. We just need to get them to be nice and give their money willingly.
>>70016633
>that MARKET is inefficient
Why is that? Why is it inefficient if it's competing with 50 other billion dollar companies, and maybe many more <billion dollar companies? What do you mean by inefficient exactly?
>>70016673
This video says absolutely nothing worthwhile. Trickle-down economics refers to supply-side economics. Just because supply-side doesn't claim the wealth will literally trickle down doesn't mean the criticism of it isn't legitimate.
>>70016633
>The overall value of the market would be higher it were composed of smaller firms.
Hold up. Why does that makes sense? Some products can't even be made by companies worth less than a billion, such as mass market cars or CPU manufacturers.
>>70016633
>That market is inefficient because a large successful company is making a large income
You do know what the term "free market" means right?
>>70006578
Problem is those .01% ers aren't typically CEOs they are financial type ppls and banks making ass loads of.money off the fedS low interest rates. Borrowing dirt cheap money and making purely financial investments (ie not investment in infrastructure or r and d type shit) then making billions off the cheap loans. Raise the interest rate to a reasonable.level and that income gap will disappear fast. As those finance people turn to traditional investments that are less costly than fed loans and accidentally add real jobs to the market raising demand for workers and bringing wages up while also diminishing the uber wealth somewhat.
>>70006197
This. Cuckservatives praise Reagan when he pulled his amnesty shit.
>>70016359
Ah sorry, that wasn't you. I am referring to
>First answer was a joke, you asspie
in >>70015062
This post chain is getting even more confusing because it seems I am arguing on the same side of this issue as you are, that CEO's "unfair" salaries are completely justified based on the value they generate for society and the limited supply of people capable of performing that job to a high standard.
>>70016793
>forgot the "x"
x is irrelevant. The fact that you think extraordinary value can't be generated be multiplying the labor of thousands to millions of workers is why I believe you aren't seeing the big picture here.
>>70017041
If you are proposing that the current 1% typically got their wealth off of unjust cronyism in today's age, I would agree.
>>70012457
You're ignoring his question.
>>70003799
>>70004102
>>70004270
>>70004986
>>70005936
>>70006768
>>70007038
>>70007102
>>70010450
>>70012619
Tax cuts have always been about raising tax revenue, even though it seems crazy. Bush, Reagan, Kennedy, and Coolidge all cut taxes so rich people would be motivated to stop hiding taxes. And it worked.
Trickle-down economics was a retarded meme started by some comedian democrat and FDR.
No true economist has EVER promoted trickle-down economics.
It is the greatest example of strawmanning.
Will you ignorant liberals please stop listening to comedians and "THE NRA'S COMING TO KILL OF US" talking heads for your information?
Why does /pol/ love to bootlick that hard? Is it bc there are so many richfags here or are they just dreaming about it?
>>70015676
>Wealth is wealth. You can take it anywhere, it travels great.
You do know that "wealth" includes assets, which includes real estate?
>inb4 just sell it hur dur
Never mind how long it takes for large property sales, good luck finding people willing to buy.
>>70017238
They're just dreaming about it. Most likely they are primarily from an upper middle class background, grew up getting everything handed to them, and think they deserve the world. They have no understanding of the social contract or the ways in which a functioning society makes it possible for them to build any wealth at all.
>>70017249
takes a few months at most. If you don't mind selling at a slightly lower price to sell faster.
>>70017207
The answer is "none" for the comprehensive reading impaired.
>>70017238
>>70017472
Keep up with the strawmen and ad hominem lefties.
It's just as valid as a real argument.
>>70003799
Fun fact: no one but the left calls it trickle down economics.
>>70003799
Trickle up economics is where its at.
War soon. Video I did last night.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVvUmdy5JMM
World War III --- Coming soon. June 6th, 2016
Summary
War in Syria will spread to Saudi Arabia and Iran. Oil production will be crippled to 10% Triggering financial collapse. Zionists I tell you all Zionists.
>>70015676
>it travels great
There are limits to this shit, though. For example, if I'm a property mogul in America, I can't just fly all of my property out to Australia. I can steadily funnel revenues from my businesses into Australia, but these ultra-richfags don't just hold bank accounts with 9 0's, their money is commited to some form of investment or consumption. If it wasn't, it wouldn't show up on GDP. The money you're talking about is sunk, one way or another.
The emigration of the rich is a real concern, but the situation proposed is mindless.
>>70016909
There aren't many markets (none I can think of, but maybe restaurants) with 50 billion dollar companies. And fifty companies is hardly a lot. Competition is the driving force that makes the free market so great, so the smaller the companies the more efficient the market.
>>70017002
I'm not disagreeing that airplanes aren't going to be made by thousands of different 5 man small businesses, but that doesn't mean the market isn't (inherently) inefficient.
>>70017199
I'm really just arguing that the praise of the 1% being the best of us and our integral leaders is not really accurate. The best markets aren't the ones that create billionaires.
>>70017763
Self-promotional bullshit
Click only if you want to support an attention whore who thinks injecting his crap videos into random threads is a worthwhile use of your time.
True equality is impossible. Listen to the Black Economics Man tell you himself.
http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-528-sowell-on-inequality-and-why-equality-is-an-impossible-goal/
>>70016835
>We just need to get them to be nice and give their money willingly.
Violence should work here.
>>70017843
>I'm really just arguing that the praise of the 1% being the best of us
Best morally? Best humans? No, not any of these. But clearly very good at something, provided they didn't exploit cronyism to see that wealth.
>The best markets aren't the ones that create billionaires.
Would you care to elaborate or should I just accept this as fact?
>>70017843
>And fifty companies is hardly a lot.
But it is. There's shittones of small iduesties taht don;t compete with that many companies either, like mom and pop clothes shops and restaurants. You're only going to eat or buy at ones that are near by, and there's rarely more than 50.
>so the smaller the companies the more efficient the market.
The number of companies competing is not the only thing that can make a market efficient. As i said, mass market cars and computer ships would not even exist without sufficiently large companies. Some markets require insane amounts of capital simply to contribute to at all.
Do you think we shouldn't be allowed to have mass market cars because those companies are too big? What about computer processors?
>>70017763
>trickle up economics
Love it!
>>70017843
>but that doesn't mean the market isn't (inherently) inefficient.
It's as "efficient" as it can possibly be, so is your point exactly? I'm saying one person can produce 2000 times more wealth than the average. Yes, it generally requires large companies. What's the issue?
>>70018239
I don't have much time to elaborate. But this was a nice discussion
>>70018279
The car industry collapsed and computer processors are made by slave labor. These are the kinds of inefficiencies I mean
>>70018408
>What's the issue?
Boeing and Airbus do stupid shit all the time because of the way their market works. Hardly economic perfection.
>>70018449
>The car industry collapsed
They still sell cars last time i checked. What the fuck are you talking about? What is your point even?
>computer processors are made by slave labor
Point me to a company that uses "slave labour" to make computer processor.
![berlin09-1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/P6CeyIh.jpg "berlin09-1[1]")
