If the left believe that TDE doesn't work, how come they say that all white people today benefitted from slavery 200 years ago? Why do they think that all white people in America have "privilege" from slavery when only 11 states allowed slavery and <1% of the pop. at the time even owned slaves?
>>76785092
Because CEOs have just been increasing their own wages (Even in recessions) without increasing the wage of their workers. Companies have literally contributed to the destruction of the traditional family. When this started happening families found themselves having to send their wife to work since the male's wage was stagnating and inflation was occurring. Now we are in a hole where upward mobility is practically dead. America was the best when we taxed and regulated the shit out of large company owners and the 1%.
>>76785694
That doesn't answer my question...
>>76785092
2 things wrong with your assumptions.
Firstly, Reaganomics was predicated on its ability to deliver gains in the short to medium term, not 200 years later.
Secondly, the benefits of being white in America are not an economic trickle down.
>TDE doesn't work, how come they say that all white people today benefitted from slavery 200 years ago?
>>76785092
Nobody has ever proposed or endorsed "trickle down economics"
It's a strawman fabricated by the left. It has no substance to it, it's just a buzzword.
>>76785694
You can blame feminism for inflation and diluting the job the pool.
>>76785968
Then please enlighten us as to how being white in America is any better or worse than any other race?
You can't? You mean we are all treated equally here? We have the same rights? Oh thanks!
>>76786546
>Nobody has ever proposed or endorsed "trickle down economics"
No, they've just proposed and endorsed "supply-side economics". A rose by any other name would make the same people just as rich.
>>76785092
pee pee poo poo
There we go. This thread need something of substance
>>76787055
That's an entirely different mantra.
"Trickle-down economics" allegedly proposes making the rich richer and hoping the lower class gets a piece -- an incredibly easy philosophy to tackle.
"Supply-side economics" proposes stimulating production rather than aggregate demand, which is entirely sound.
Any idiot can recognize the qualitative differences, especially considering the former was entirely made up to manipulate the narrative.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
