The 'trickle down theory' is dead wrong

[Where_r_my_Keys]

"Trickle Down" economics is just Keynesian economics for Republicans.

Keynesian Economics for Republicans is just Keynesian Economics... PERIOD.

Which is "Trickle Down Economics", as such exists only in socialism and it is known more commonly as simply: WELFARE.

 

[M14 Shooter]

:doh:
How much of your personal spending do you get to write off?
That businesses get to deduct expenses from their incomes in no way means people have an incentive to spend more when taxed more.

Let me use small words....

Because you don;t know any big words, eh?

The theory behind trickle down is if you cut taxes for the wealthy, they will INVEST more and that that will lead to economic growth; not that they will go out and by another Benz. Money that they invest; that they use to build the economy is a business expense.

All of that is nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with what you said.

You said:
And why would folks refrain from spending because they are taxed? They would spend more to avoid paying taxes

You then immediately said:
Have someone explain to you how businesses get to deduct their expenses from their income

Your 2nd statement does not support your first because "folks" don't get to deduct expenses like businesses do.

If you have no idea what is being discussed, stop commenting.

Sorry, I assumed a certain intellect here. I guess I overestimated. The discussion is about supply side economics or "trickle down".

I'm sorry - we're discussing what you said, as quoted.

1: And why would folks refrain from spending because they are taxed? They would spend more to avoid paying taxes
2: Have someone explain to you how businesses get to deduct their expenses from their income

Your 2nd statement does not support your first because "folks" don't get to deduct expenses like businesses do; that you refuse to understand this denotes the inability or unwillingness to admit how wrong you are.
So... which is it?

You realize that you've entered a discussion of objective mathematics, with people who believe that a white woman IS BLACK, because she 'identifies' as black? The same people who believe that a MAN who identifies as a 'woman', IS a woman, because he 'feels' he's a woman?

If you've got a second, would ya help me to understand what you're hanging on to, that gives you the hope that such people have the slightest means to recognize any objectively founded concept?

They're quite mad, you know... and it's getting worse, by the hour..., I just read that some poor soul 'identifies' as a paraplegic, so he is asking his doctor to cut his arms off. This behind the person from last week who only wanted ONE ARM removed... .

SOooo... while I admire the debate and the optimism, I simply do not see the point of trying to understand the economic reasoning of a people who clearly no longer possess the sense that God gave a turnip.

I was going to say a goat but turnip works just as well.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Let me use small words....

Because you don;t know any big words, eh?

The theory behind trickle down is if you cut taxes for the wealthy, they will INVEST more and that that will lead to economic growth; not that they will go out and by another Benz. Money that they invest; that they use to build the economy is a business expense.

All of that is nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with what you said.

You said:
And why would folks refrain from spending because they are taxed? They would spend more to avoid paying taxes

You then immediately said:
Have someone explain to you how businesses get to deduct their expenses from their income

Your 2nd statement does not support your first because "folks" don't get to deduct expenses like businesses do.

If you have no idea what is being discussed, stop commenting.

Sorry, I assumed a certain intellect here. I guess I overestimated. The discussion is about supply side economics or "trickle down".

I'm sorry - we're discussing what you said, as quoted.

1: And why would folks refrain from spending because they are taxed? They would spend more to avoid paying taxes
2: Have someone explain to you how businesses get to deduct their expenses from their income

Your 2nd statement does not support your first because "folks" don't get to deduct expenses like businesses do; that you refuse to understand this denotes the inability or unwillingness to admit how wrong you are.
So... which is it?

You realize that you've entered a discussion of objective mathematics, with people who believe that a white woman IS BLACK, because she 'identifies' as black? The same people who believe that a MAN who identifies as a 'woman', IS a woman, because he 'feels' he's a woman?

If you've got a second, would ya help me to understand what you're hanging on to, that gives you the hope that such people have the slightest means to recognize any objectively founded concept?

They're quite mad, you know... and it's getting worse, by the hour..., I just read that some poor soul 'identifies' as a paraplegic, so he is asking his doctor to cut his arms off. This behind the person from last week who only wanted ONE ARM removed... .

SOooo... while I admire the debate and the optimism, I simply do not see the point of trying to understand the economic reasoning of a people who clearly no longer possess the sense that God gave a turnip.

I was going to say a goat but turnip works just as well.

Goat's accurate, but that is offensive to Islamic Sex Slaves... .

 

[M14 Shooter]

Actually, that is not historically true. Reagan cut and then raised taxes. As a % of GDP, taxes were 18.2 % under Reagan, 18.1 under Carter. Since he did not cut taxes as a % of GDP, the growth the economy experienced was not a product of the tax rate cuts.

Scoff...
You obviously do not understand that this is entirely dependent on the specific taxes that were cut and raised, and by how much.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Because you don;t know any big words, eh?
All of that is nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with what you said.

You said:
And why would folks refrain from spending because they are taxed? They would spend more to avoid paying taxes

You then immediately said:
Have someone explain to you how businesses get to deduct their expenses from their income

Your 2nd statement does not support your first because "folks" don't get to deduct expenses like businesses do.

If you have no idea what is being discussed, stop commenting.

Sorry, I assumed a certain intellect here. I guess I overestimated. The discussion is about supply side economics or "trickle down".

I'm sorry - we're discussing what you said, as quoted.

1: And why would folks refrain from spending because they are taxed? They would spend more to avoid paying taxes
2: Have someone explain to you how businesses get to deduct their expenses from their income

Your 2nd statement does not support your first because "folks" don't get to deduct expenses like businesses do; that you refuse to understand this denotes the inability or unwillingness to admit how wrong you are.
So... which is it?

You realize that you've entered a discussion of objective mathematics, with people who believe that a white woman IS BLACK, because she 'identifies' as black? The same people who believe that a MAN who identifies as a 'woman', IS a woman, because he 'feels' he's a woman?

If you've got a second, would ya help me to understand what you're hanging on to, that gives you the hope that such people have the slightest means to recognize any objectively founded concept?

They're quite mad, you know... and it's getting worse, by the hour..., I just read that some poor soul 'identifies' as a paraplegic, so he is asking his doctor to cut his arms off. This behind the person from last week who only wanted ONE ARM removed... .

SOooo... while I admire the debate and the optimism, I simply do not see the point of trying to understand the economic reasoning of a people who clearly no longer possess the sense that God gave a turnip.

I was going to say a goat but turnip works just as well.

Goat's accurate, but that is offensive to Islamic Sex Slaves... .

Far be it from me to offend an islamofascist.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The problem with Greece is that no one PAID their taxes.

dear, we pay our taxes and we're $20 trillion in debt with $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Please just read these posts but don't respond to them. Thanks

 

[LOki]

"Trickle Down" economics is just Keynesian economics for Republicans.

Keynesian Economics for Republicans is just Keynesian Economics... PERIOD.

Which is "Trickle Down Economics", as such exists only in socialism and it is known more commonly as simply: WELFARE.

OH, YOU FUCKING CAUGHT ME!!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

"Trickle Down" economics is just Keynesian economics for Republicans.

Keynesian Economics for Republicans is just Keynesian Economics... PERIOD.

Which is "Trickle Down Economics", as such exists only in socialism and it is known more commonly as simply: WELFARE.

OH, YOU FUCKING CAUGHT ME!!!

liberal's don't like trickle down economics, they only like trickle down welfare entitlements

 

[The Rabbi]

trickle down is the derisive Progressive misnomer for Reaganomics

Actually, the trickle down theory has been around much longer than Reagan.

I give you William Jennings Bryan and his famous "Cross of Gold" speech in 1896:

There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it.

You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard. I tell you that the great cities rest upon these broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic. But destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.

What the fuck does that have to do with Reagan?

I am pointing out the "trickle down theory" term was not invented for Reaganomics. In fact, Reaganomics wasn't invented by Reagan or his staff. They just rebranded it.

The "trickle down theory" (Reaganomics) and those who have derided it, have been around for over a century.

The "trickle down theory" name was invented long before Reagan.

There is no such thing as "trickle down theory", Nimrod. It is merely a term used by liberals who dont understand economics. It's like social darwinism. Only liberals use the term.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

No fucking way! (The reading is interesting, it's settled once and for all, trickle down economics is a fucking joke, can't believe people still defend it.)

Wealth does not trickle down from the rich to the poor. Period.
That's not Senator Elizabeth Warren talking. That's the latest conclusion of new research from the International Monetary Fund.

In fact, researchers found that when the top earners in society make more money, it actually slows down economic growth. On the other hand, when poorer people earn more, society as a whole benefits.

The researchers calculated that when the richest 20% of society increase their income by one percentage point, the annual rate of growth shrinks by nearly 0.1% within five years.

This shows that "the benefits do not trickle down," the researchers wrote in their report, which analyzed over 150 countries.

By contrast, when the lowest 20% of earners see their income grow by one percentage point, the rate of growth increases by nearly 0.4% over the same period.

Continued here: The trickle down theory is dead wrong - Jun. 15 2015

I can easily see the correlation.....ONCE.....things have gotten to where they are today.

I can see where trickle down works in many instances too.

We are not the only country with a fat 1%.

"The researchers calculated that when the richest 20% of society increase their income by one percentage point, the annual rate of growth shrinks by nearly 0.1% within five years.

This shows that "the benefits do not trickle down," the researchers wrote in their report, which analyzed over 150 countries.

By contrast, when the lowest 20% of earners see their income grow by one percentage point, the rate of growth increases by nearly 0.4% over the same period."

Please don't tell me you assume that everything else is constant in these environment.

I am not a fan of trickledown the way the far right plays it out.

But Bushynomics was not Reaganomics. Yet the left insisted on tying them together.

I also have an issue with trying to tease out 0.1% value (1 in a thousand) over five years. The noise alone is greater than that. I wish these people would do a little better.

The 0.4% number is more compelling IME. First, it is larger. Second it represents a much better compounding value for the lower 20%.

Keep in mind that the lower 20% of year 1 are almost never the lower 20% of year 5....but I digress.

Read the study, they take alot of things into account.

I did. The problem is with the sensitivity. If you work in statistics, you know that the ability to pull this kind of precision out of a measurement can be tough. Accounting for all other variables in a system as fluid as a national economy would seem next to impossible.

 

[initforme]

If you are a hatred worker willing to sacrifice

1). You WILL NOT get far ahead unless you already have ALOT of money. Ain't happening... forget it.
2) Don't complain it beats socialism and communism and other models. Is it fair? Not really. Does everyone have a chance to succeed? Not at all. But one can feed themselves and a family if they make north of $30 per hour with bunnies. Otherwise, forget it. Just be happy with what you have.
3). A large percentage of companies are BAD places to work. Do your research and avoid about 60 percent of them as they see you as nothing but a leech. Stay with the reputable ones.
4). You owe your boss nothing... if you find a better job you DO NOT have to give 2 weeks notice. Simply walk away. A worker has that in their arse3nal.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I did. The problem is with the sensitivity. If you work in statistics, you know that the ability to pull this kind of precision out of a measurement can be tough. Accounting for all other variables in a system as fluid as a national economy would seem next to impossible.

Yes it seems absurd especially when we have extreme capitalism (trickle down to PR minded or illiterate liberals) in China that has created 1000's of super rich, a vast middle class whereas 15 years ago there was no middle class, and eliminated 40% of the worlds poverty.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

trickle down is the derisive Progressive misnomer for Reaganomics

Actually, the trickle down theory has been around much longer than Reagan.

I give you William Jennings Bryan and his famous "Cross of Gold" speech in 1896:

There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it.

You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard. I tell you that the great cities rest upon these broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic. But destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.

Obviously, William Jennings Bryan was right and Reagan was wrong.

Why was Reagan wrong? And please, be specific.

Because this happened:

ROFLMNAO!

Poor Gilligan.

 

[BluesLegend]

The elephant in the room is the corrupt idiots in government are the last people I would trust with our wealth, HELLO.

But you'd trust the corporate interests?

Over government well let me just think about that...

Corporations - I give corporations my best effort at work and they give me gobs of money and benefits in return.

Asshole Government Liberals - They take gobs of my money without so much as a thank you, call me a racist, tell me I'm not paying my fair share, constantly threaten to take even more of my money first chance they get, and feel entitled to the money I worked hard to earn citing some twisted fucking communist rationalization that I didn't build that.

The choice seems clear.

 

[NYcarbineer]

But you'd trust the corporate interests?

A corporate interests provides either a product or a service... I trust them to perform on their promise or I refuse to pay them.

Can I do that with Government, Gilligan?

(Gilligan, the answer is: "No Sir, you can't.")

You get to vote like everyone else.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted, lil' buddy.

What do you want, more than your vote?

LOL! Poor Gilligan... . If invalid reason were suddenly struck impossible for the human mind to create... (OH! Well now, that wouldn't effect the Left at all would it?

My bad folks... Bad Example... )

If mammals were suddenly struck incapable of expressing invalid thought... the Ideological Left would be struck silent, in that instant.

So what do you want other than your vote? If you RWnuts weren't such a comically small minority, maybe you could have the sort of fucked up country you want.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So what do you want other than your vote? If you RWnuts weren't such a comically small minority, maybe you could have the sort of fucked up country you want.

Well, I say we go to war, that's nature's way of solving these little quibbles

You, the delusional, just keep informing the RW minority that we must accept Eddy Identifying as a Goat and no doubt, you'll get us there soon enough and this will all work itself out.

 

[paddymurphy]

The problem with Greece is that no one PAID their taxes.

dear, we pay our taxes and we're $20 trillion in debt with $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Please just read these posts but don't respond to them. Thanks

And when this debts come due, we are in trouble. Except, of course they never come due and they are owed to us.

 

[Dragonlady]

The problem with Greece is that no one PAID their taxes.

dear, we pay our taxes and we're $20 trillion in debt with $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Please just read these posts but don't respond to them. Thanks

No you don't pay your taxes because Bush cut taxes and then went to war, and created Medicare, Part D, without taxing to fund either the war or the social program.

Republicans refused to let the tax cuts expire after Obama was elected, not to mention that it is unwise to raise taxes during a recession.

The U.S. has the highest military spending in the world - higher than the next 10 highest countries combined, but one of lowest personal tax rates in the First World. So no you don't pay your taxes.

As for not responding to the idiocies you post, kindly go fuck yourself Eddie.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The problem with Greece is that no one PAID their taxes.

dear, we pay our taxes and we're $20 trillion in debt with $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Please just read these posts but don't respond to them. Thanks

You were given tax cuts by Reagan despite his increases in spending, not the least of which was his escalation of the Cold War. You were given tax cuts by GW Bush despite our being faced with the extra costs of two wars to fight. Both McCain and Romney wanted to cut taxes while increasing military spending.

See the pattern here. Since Vietnam, we stopped paying for the wars we fight and the costs of the military that supports our fighting those almost incessant wars.

THAT is where this country went wrong fiscally. Period.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

No you don't pay your taxes because Bush cut taxes...

Reader, keep in mind that the above drivel comes from the same mindset that accepts white people "identifying" as black and men "identifying" as woman.

This is what is OKA: Delusion.

The specific delusion being presented there is simply that Government owns you... This government owns the product of your labor.

Now ... The hilarity comes in, where that where that same person would tell you that she abhors that the U.S. once allowed slavery