The case for trickle up economics

[The Rabbi]

if no one wanted it how could it sell well??????????????

Exactly! Consumers drive the market. That didn't take you so long. </thread>

what? how can they drive the market when we got from the stone age to here thanks to new inventions???

Do you advance history by being a consumer which every human being on earth is or by being a 1 in a million inventor?? A society that equates consumer dolts with inventors will obviously be short lived.

Who advances history, Edison or an idiot who buys Edison's light bulb?
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

This stupid idea has been put to the test and failed so many times only an idiot would believe it. We had "consumer stimulus" from Ford and from Bush, twice. All three times it was a gross failure. You cannot stimulate anything but taking money from productive people and giving it to unproductive ones. Only a moron would think that.

 

[Cowman]

Paying people to be poor is the most ridiculous concept to ever leak out of a crack in the liberal mind.
They believe that the ecomony will improve if we take money from consumers and give that money to the poor so they will be consumers. That's the idea. If the poor weren't so damn jealous of the "rich" they'd be working themselves. As it is, there aren't enough really rich people to support the growing numbers of poor. The term "rich" has to be revised down, the rich now make $100,000 a year. By this time next year it will be $50,000.

A dumber post I have not read.

Paying people to be poor? No, it's about increasing the standard of living for the poorest Americans... giving us that extra edge of quality life among first world nations.

And there's more than enough wealth out there to support our population... don't be an idiot.

 

[Cowman]

Not really.


Then again, I have forgotten more about economics then you will ever know.

It's amazing how many unemployed self-proclaimed economic experts we have on this site.

I've already made more this morning than you will make this month, I reckon.

Then again, that is such a low bar.

Man... you can sure weed out the actual wealthy people on the internet... by eliminating the ones who brag about wealth.

You're not what you say you are.

 

[Cowman]

It's amazing how many unemployed self-proclaimed economic experts we have on this site.

I've already made more this morning than you will make this month, I reckon.

Then again, that is such a low bar.

Doing what exactly?

Selling his soft supple body.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

[
Paying people to be poor? No, it's about increasing the standard of living for the poorest Americans... giving us that extra edge of quality life among first world nations.

And there's more than enough wealth out there to support our population... don't be an idiot.

increasing the standard of living with welfare just creates more people in need. Ben Franklin said making people too easy in their poverty is the best way to promote poverty.

Now you know why poverty benefits are up 500% in the last 20 years but still the libturds want more and more to fight poverty.

 

[The Rabbi]

Poverty rates were declining faster from 1948 to 1965 then they did from 1965 on. Coincidence? I dont think so.

 

[RDD_1210]

if no one wanted it how could it sell well??????????????

Exactly! Consumers drive the market. That didn't take you so long. </thread>

what? how can they drive the market when we got from the stone age to here thanks to new inventions???

Do you advance history by being a consumer which every human being on earth is or by being a 1 in a million inventor?? A society that equates consumer dolts with inventors will obviously be short lived.

Who advances history, Edison or an idiot who buys Edison's light bulb?
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point. The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

 

[Duped]

Poverty rates were declining faster from 1948 to 1965 then they did from 1965 on. Coincidence? I dont think so.

Good thing you ain't a betting man being a moron and all. Weak - you got to be kidding.!
Obama is the weakest pres. since Carter.

 

[Cowman]

[
Paying people to be poor? No, it's about increasing the standard of living for the poorest Americans... giving us that extra edge of quality life among first world nations.

And there's more than enough wealth out there to support our population... don't be an idiot.

increasing the standard of living with welfare just creates more people in need. Ben Franklin said making people too easy in their poverty is the best way to promote poverty.

Now you know why poverty benefits are up 500% in the last 20 years but still the libturds want more and more to fight poverty.

Who the fuck is talking about welfare? Talking about encouraging increased pay for your average low level worker, increasing the take home pay of the working class.

There's more than enough money to make small changes that would have drastic positive effects that would ripple across the pond, but there's too many of you assholes that believe money should be distilled and hoarded by the very few.

 

[dilloduck]

Exactly! Consumers drive the market. That didn't take you so long. </thread>

what? how can they drive the market when we got from the stone age to here thanks to new inventions???

Do you advance history by being a consumer which every human being on earth is or by being a 1 in a million inventor?? A society that equates consumer dolts with inventors will obviously be short lived.

Who advances history, Edison or an idiot who buys Edison's light bulb?
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point. The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

Investors, inventors and marketing tell consumers what choices they have. If not for them, consumers would have nothing to choose from.

 

[dilloduck]

[
Paying people to be poor? No, it's about increasing the standard of living for the poorest Americans... giving us that extra edge of quality life among first world nations.

And there's more than enough wealth out there to support our population... don't be an idiot.

increasing the standard of living with welfare just creates more people in need. Ben Franklin said making people too easy in their poverty is the best way to promote poverty.

Now you know why poverty benefits are up 500% in the last 20 years but still the libturds want more and more to fight poverty.

Who the fuck is talking about welfare? Talking about encouraging increased pay for your average low level worker, increasing the take home pay of the working class.

There's more than enough money to make small changes that would have drastic positive effects that would ripple across the pond, but there's too many of you assholes that believe money should be distilled and hoarded by the very few.

So I assume you are anti-IMF ? UN and all those other great global organizations ?

 

[RDD_1210]

what? how can they drive the market when we got from the stone age to here thanks to new inventions???

Do you advance history by being a consumer which every human being on earth is or by being a 1 in a million inventor?? A society that equates consumer dolts with inventors will obviously be short lived.

Who advances history, Edison or an idiot who buys Edison's light bulb?
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point. The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

Investors, inventors and marketing tell consumers what choices they have. If not for them, consumers would have nothing to choose from.

And none of those can overcome a shitty product, a product that isn't liked or a consumer base that doesn't have disposable income.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere?

I just said 98% in private sector and 99.99% in public sector.

Jesus you're missing the point. The consumers decide which products make it and which don't.

all agree!! the Edisons invent the light bulbs and the dolts buy the cheapest . Everyone on earth is a born consumer. 1 in a million is a Republican inventor. Catching on now?

It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

too stupid!!! but perfectly 100% liberal!!! venture capitalists call it "shots on goal" the lower the capital gains tax the more venture capital they have and the more reseach or shots on goal they can fund!!! See how you've been brainwashed and have no idea!!!

Investors, inventors and marketing tell consumers what choices they have. If not for them, consumers would have nothing to choose from.

yes Republican investors invent the future. They got us from the stone age to hear, obviously!!

And none of those can overcome a shitty product, a product that isn't liked

yes all agree the a light bulb that doesn't light will fail. So????

or a consumer base that doesn't have disposable income.

a consumer base??? every human being is born part of the consumer base.

disposable income??? Imagine if back in the stone age you gave folks income to buy stuff?? It would not have advanced progress one second. Imagine if you had encouraged inventors like Edison and Jobs!!

garbage men and consumers are necessary but they don't cause progress!! See why we say liberals are slow. You could pile the streets high with garbage and give billions to each consumer and it would not do a thing to advance our standard of living!!

 

[Rozman]

We'll give tax breaks to the poor so they will have more money with which to invent products and create jobs to make those products???
Is there a simpler way to end this depression??

Well, demand side economics does make sense, but I would reword it a little:

We'll give tax breaks to the poor and middle class so they will have more money with which to buy products and create jobs demand to make more, better and new products???

Is there a simpler way to end this depression??

How does this create jobs here?
You give more money to people to buy products made over seas.
This is the best you guys have.....

 

[Rozman]

Like Romney said.
There are plenty of safety nets for the poor now.
We need to get a robust economy going so
they will not have to use those safety nets.

 

[The Rabbi]

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point. The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

Investors, inventors and marketing tell consumers what choices they have. If not for them, consumers would have nothing to choose from.

And none of those can overcome a shitty product, a product that isn't liked or a consumer base that doesn't have disposable income.

Your point is?
Every product that is brought to market, and even if it isn't, represents jobs for someone. How much money do start ups spend? How many people do they hire?
Business investment drives the economy, not consumer spending. This has been demonstrated so manhy times in so many ways only the willfully stupid do not understand this.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Business investment drives the economy, not consumer spending.

if consumer spending drove the economy in a meaningful way we could just give consumers money to spend and all economic problems would be solved forever.

In such a case:

1) more folks can buy but fewer need to work

2) manufactures focus on meeting demand, not innovation

3) inflation soars,

4) innovation dies, the economoy stagnates and declines further

 

[bripat9643]

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point.

What is the point?

The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

There's nothing to decide if someone like Edison doesn't put in the blood, sweat and tears to create something like the light bulb. Consumers don't create products.

If inventors and entrepreneurs are not rewarded for their efforts, then they stop making those efforts. Profits are also what allows a company to grow. No profits, no growth, no iPhones, no flat screen televisions, no computers.

 

[SniperFire]

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point.

What is the point?

The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

There's nothing to decide if someone like Edison doesn't put in the blood, sweat and tears to create something like the light bulb. Consumers don't create products.

If inventors and entrepreneurs are not rewarded for their efforts, then they stop making those efforts. Profits are also what allows a company to grow. No profits, no growth, no iPhones, no flat screen televisions, no computers.

What a Leftist tool such as RDD is really trying to argue is that there exists a perpetual motion consumption machine which does not run on worker productivity.

'Demand' is ubiquitous as evidenced by half of the world going hungry. Unless there is capital investment to actually create goods and services and drive productivity (which to a worker is earnings and ability to pay) said potential consumer starves to death.

 

[The Rabbi]

Should I list out the countless inventions that went nowhere? Jesus you're missing the point.

What is the point?

The consumers decide which products make it and which don't. It has nothing to do with how rich or how many tax breaks we give to rich investors.

There's nothing to decide if someone like Edison doesn't put in the blood, sweat and tears to create something like the light bulb. Consumers don't create products.

If inventors and entrepreneurs are not rewarded for their efforts, then they stop making those efforts. Profits are also what allows a company to grow. No profits, no growth, no iPhones, no flat screen televisions, no computers.

What a Leftist tool such as RDD is really trying to argue is that there exists a perpetual motion consumption machine which does not run on worker productivity.

'Demand' is ubiquitous as evidenced by half of the world going hungry. Unless there is capital investment to actually create goods and services and drive productivity (which to a worker is earnings and ability to pay) said potential consumer starves to death.

Excellent point.
Africa is filled with demand. It is also filled with starvation and disease.
Demand does not create anything.