Republican economic policy

[Wiseacre]

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. Are you suggesting that economic policy decisions should always favor the wealthy because if they don't the wealthy will defect?

No, but I am saying we need to be pragmatic about it. If you implement a policy that fosters economic growth and job creation, there is no way to avoid the result that the rich guys will profit the most by whatever action is taken. You can call that favoring the wealthy, that seems to be the liberal mindest. But I don't see it as favoring the rich, I see it as growing the economy which helps everybody.

If you look back throughout our history, there have been marked examples where the economy grew like gang busters, but it surely did NOT help everybody. The idea that a growing GDP necessarily helps everyone, is naive at best, and sinister at worst.

Oh, I don't know, are you sure that eventually economic growth didn't help everyone even a little bit? Certainly there were times when the disparity was quite high, where the rich really got most of the new wealth. But the standard of living for everyone has steadily risen from the very beginning of this country, I am unaware of any period where it hasn't been going up. Nothing naive or sinister about that.

Which is not to say I think republican policies are always the best idea. We aren't promoting competition and increased opportunity for the most people as well as I would like. I despise gov't bailouts, subsidies, and tax breaks, and I do not believe we need to get rid of all regulation; gov't has a role to play, just not as much as we currently have. Compared to liberal policies, I think the conservative approach is better.

 

[Wiseacre]

The way I see it that extra dollar in the rich mans pocket leads to productivity down the chain, thus keeping the economy moving at multiple levels.

The extra dollar in the poor mans pocket nets you no return productivity.

Not really. Quite often the rich will just put their money into savings. Or go to Europe and spend it. But each dollar a poor person has gets spent on a good or service in the US.

The "trickle-down" model has been a failure as the last decade has shown us.

Savings used to be the way banks loaned money for houses, and thus leading to productivity in the housing industry.

Also most rich people dont save, they invest. and money invested typically is used to do things, like expanding businesses, which leads to further productivity.

While poor people do spend money on things, it is often low value items, and not enough to sustain a national economy.

There is no evidence that poor people will go out and spend every dollar they are given. And there are also social and psychological aspects to redistributing wealth from one person to another. Not really good for either party, the rich person is disincentivized to make more money and the poor person is disincentivized to find a job. There's a lot more to it than that, but I would rather create an environment that provides more opportunities for work than an environment that doesn't.

 

[Wiseacre]

" Is there a market incentive that will over time "share the profits" to the middle and lower end of the economy? "

I think there is, it's called more competition and a more attractive business climate. Little guys are at a disadvantage, and that's gotta change. Some would say that's a republican policy, but I think in actuality it's both parties vying for money and power from the big corps. I do think the liberal policies of bigger gov't, higher taxes, and more regulation are not conducive to that end.

 

[Avatar4321]

Fact or fiction...

Republican economic policy always prioritizes (favors) the wealthy over the poor and middle-class.

Please discuss with real world examples, and keep it clean.

Fiction. Republican economic policy prioritizes individual liberty. Doesnt matter what class you are because classes dont exist.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs.

No it doesn't.

It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.

No it doesn't, Republican policies actually make it harder for people to get ahead

The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit.

They did not.

As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s.

Reagan cut the upper tax bracket down from 70% to 50%. Bush cut it down from 39.6% to 35%. If you can't see the difference then give up on life.

The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate;

Only to the extent it makes the rich richer.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The way I see it that extra dollar in the rich mans pocket leads to productivity down the chain, thus keeping the economy moving at multiple levels.

The extra dollar in the poor mans pocket nets you no return productivity.

Please, explain. Explain how the poor buying food and gas and rent has absolutely not positive impact on our economy, while a rich man sticking a dollar in a Swiss bank account does.

 

[martybegan]

The way I see it that extra dollar in the rich mans pocket leads to productivity down the chain, thus keeping the economy moving at multiple levels.

The extra dollar in the poor mans pocket nets you no return productivity.

Please, explain. Explain how the poor buying food and gas and rent has absolutely not positive impact on our economy, while a rich man sticking a dollar in a Swiss bank account does.

If the poor earned it by doing work, they add to the overall productivity of the economy. If they get it as a handout, they do not.

When a large portion of the economy work on getting something for nothing, then the whole system doesnt work.

 

[eflatminor]

The way I see it that extra dollar in the rich mans pocket leads to productivity down the chain, thus keeping the economy moving at multiple levels.

The extra dollar in the poor mans pocket nets you no return productivity.

Please, explain. Explain how the poor buying food and gas and rent has absolutely not positive impact on our economy

It does have a positive impact on the economy, unless of course the money used to buy that food, gas and rent was first taken out of the economy by stealing it from productive citizens, in which case it's at best a zero net gain. Throw in the bureaucratic overhead and inevitable money lost to government fraud and waist...and you've got a net loss to the economy.

while a rich man sticking a dollar in a Swiss bank account does

Because money held in a bank account is there to be lent to borrowers, who spend it on everything from personal projects (such as new bathroom) to starting a new company, all of which are job creators...and a positive impact on the economy.

Now if you want to bitch about it being a Swiss bank account vs a US bank account, talk to your nanny state meddlers that tax money earned overseas here in America. That's something the countries with whom we compete do not do.