The Failure Of “Trickle Down”, and The Generation That Understands This

[Iceweasel]

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

What they do is take the concept of collectivism and morph that conveniently into "socialistic" which they then pass off as a form of Socialism. By doing this, they can make virtually any governing or managing structure a "Socialist" one.

Utilizing our freedom and democracy in order to provide for the collective is NOT Socialism. They want to point to these constitutionally democratic systems and say... look, those work well, therefore, socialism works well too!

The truth of the matter is, even in the examples of democratic collectivism they typically cite, the results are never the most efficient. We don't implement them for efficiency, we do so for effectiveness. Let's take the Post Office for example... The private sector has proven it can provide the service of parcel and post delivery much more efficiently and cheaper than the US Postal Service. It's not as "effective" because a free market capitalist system isn't interested in covering areas which have no profitability. The incentives are all wrong in a free market system to provide an effective solution for everybody.

It's because of this realization the framers outlined Article I Sec. 8 and granted government certain enumerated powers. It's not because it's more efficient but it's more effective. The most efficient and cheapest way to do anything is through a vibrant free market system with competition.

Yep. The founders were socialists the minute they formed a government so they could break away from socialism.

 

[danielpalos]

Libs do it to smear capitalism. And they do it because socialist have taken over the movement. All this noise boils down to capitalism vs. socialism and Trump is the personification of how evil capitalism is.

We already have plenty of socialism in this country already. Socialism and capitalism can peacefully co-exist in the same state; they have both in all our European allies, as well as our allies in Japan, Korea, and Israel. It's ridiculous to say that any economy is 100% capitalism. None of them are. But regardless, the problem isn't capitalism. The problem is the human condition of greed, which is something Conservatives never seem to account for...

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

Do you get your, "encyclopedic" understanding of Socialism, from a dictionary?

Socialism starts with a social Contract, like a Constitution.

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

What they do is take the concept of collectivism and morph that conveniently into "socialistic" which they then pass off as a form of Socialism. By doing this, they can make virtually any governing or managing structure a "Socialist" one.

Utilizing our freedom and democracy in order to provide for the collective is NOT Socialism. They want to point to these constitutionally democratic systems and say... look, those work well, therefore, socialism works well too!

The truth of the matter is, even in the examples of democratic collectivism they typically cite, the results are never the most efficient. We don't implement them for efficiency, we do so for effectiveness. Let's take the Post Office for example... The private sector has proven it can provide the service of parcel and post delivery much more efficiently and cheaper than the US Postal Service. It's not as "effective" because a free market capitalist system isn't interested in covering areas which have no profitability. The incentives are all wrong in a free market system to provide an effective solution for everybody.

It's because of this realization the framers outlined Article I Sec. 8 and granted government certain enumerated powers. It's not because it's more efficient but it's more effective. The most efficient and cheapest way to do anything is through a vibrant free market system with competition.

Dears, simply using the (other) Peoples' tax monies, is Socialism.

 

[Iceweasel]

Libs do it to smear capitalism. And they do it because socialist have taken over the movement. All this noise boils down to capitalism vs. socialism and Trump is the personification of how evil capitalism is.

We already have plenty of socialism in this country already. Socialism and capitalism can peacefully co-exist in the same state; they have both in all our European allies, as well as our allies in Japan, Korea, and Israel. It's ridiculous to say that any economy is 100% capitalism. None of them are. But regardless, the problem isn't capitalism. The problem is the human condition of greed, which is something Conservatives never seem to account for...

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

Do you get your, "encyclopedic" understanding of Socialism, from a dictionary?

Socialism starts with a social Contract, like a Constitution.

I get words from the dictionary. You make up definitions to suit yourself. I never signed any social contract.

 

[danielpalos]

Libs do it to smear capitalism. And they do it because socialist have taken over the movement. All this noise boils down to capitalism vs. socialism and Trump is the personification of how evil capitalism is.

We already have plenty of socialism in this country already. Socialism and capitalism can peacefully co-exist in the same state; they have both in all our European allies, as well as our allies in Japan, Korea, and Israel. It's ridiculous to say that any economy is 100% capitalism. None of them are. But regardless, the problem isn't capitalism. The problem is the human condition of greed, which is something Conservatives never seem to account for...

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

Do you get your, "encyclopedic" understanding of Socialism, from a dictionary?

Socialism starts with a social Contract, like a Constitution.

I get words from the dictionary. You make up definitions to suit yourself. I never signed any social contract.

It applies to the citizenry of our Republic as the Militia of the United States.

 

[The Derp]

You're gonna want this for your collection

Let's look at a graph I used two years ago, from work done by James Kennedy and Alan Greenspan, on the effect of mortgage equity withdrawals (MEWs) on the growth of the US economy.

Notice that in both 2001 and 2002, the US economy continued to grow on an annual basis (the "technical" recession was just a few quarters). Their work suggests that this growth was entirely due to MEWs. In fact, MEWs contributed over 3% to GDP growth in 2004 and 2005, and 2% in 2006. Without US homeowners using their homes as an ATM, the economy would have been very sluggish indeed, averaging much less than 1% for the six years of the Bush presidency. Indeed, as a side observation, without home equity withdrawals the economy would have been so bad it would have been almost impossible for Bush to have won a second term.

The Economic Blue Screen of Death

Boom! Thank you!

 

[skews13]

Anyone who believes "trickle down" (aka: Reaganomics) was a failure, doesn't understand "trickle down" and doesn't comprehend that ALL free market economies trickle down... that's how free markets work.

What you are basically saying is, free market capitalism is a failure. This is because you've been brainwashed by Socialist propaganda. If you want to see what happens when people abandon free market capitalism and adopt Socialism, take a look at Venezuela.

The stupidity is predicated on some rather bizarre statistical cherry-picking.... the top 0.1% are doing markedly better than anyone else.... well guess what? This is true regardless of what you're talking about. The top 0.1% of swimmers are the best swimmers in the world, they do better at swimming than everyone else. The top 0.1% monkey trainers can train monkeys better than anyone else in the world. So is it not surprising the top 0.1% of wealthy people are very good at ascertaining wealth.

The same can be said for the idiotic arguments about wealth acquisition at the top. There isn't a universe of reality where wealthy people lag behind poor people in gaining wealth. Otherwise, the wealthy would be poor and the poor wealthy.

Wealth disparity happens as the result of free enterprise in a free market with people who enjoy the freedom to prosper. This is turned into a "problem" by the Socialist when it's actually a symptom of free market economics. Do you know where you'll find wealth equality? North Korea. Aside from the dictator and his family, everyone in the country is equally poor and this is what happens in a Socialist system when your freedoms are removed.

I don't have to believe anything. I just have to notice a middleclass that used to be strong, that disappeared after the Reagan Administration.

If his policies were so great, why did his own vice president have to raise taxes to stave off a recession?

That should have been a clue right there.

But one thing always rings true with true believers.

They don't have a clue.

This is a great post. All of the true believers had better get used to the idea Reaganism won't be rearing it's ugly head again with the millennial generation.

Apparently they're intelligent enough to believe their own eyes. Not someone else's words.

 

[The Derp]

If it isn't specifically mentioned in the Constitution than no I don't believe the federal government should be doing it. So of your three examples I only support Defense spending.

OK, but that's just what you believe. That is not fact. So you have an opinion that you seem to be substituting for fact. Medicare and Social Security were both challenged in the courts by Conservatives who believed both programs were unconstitutional. They were wrong. So why do you insist on re-litigating battles that have already been fought? It makes no sense, and makes you look petty and small.

Before you start that means education, agriculture, labor and everything else that specifically isn't mentioned in the Constitution.

Neither is the word "gun" or "abortion". The Constitution is written fairly broadly and vaguely on purpose. They didn't have all the answers in 1776, and trying to apply 18th-Century thinking to 21-st century issues defeats the purpose of the Constitution and its evolution. You don't still treat medical conditions with leeches, so why would you apply 18th-century thinking to solve 21st-century problems?

I don't believe in an income tax. I find it to be immoral. I believe in only usury fees and a very small borderline non existent sales tax.

So basically, you want a serfdom.

I feel that income tax breeds class warfare. I don't see the rich as my enemy, but the government and all the parasites that work for the federal government (military is exempt from being parasites, but almost everyone else I view as such)

Class warfare has been waged in this country since 1980, only now are the middle and lower classes fighting back. We cut taxes, household debt skyrocketed, wages stagnated, and we had periods of bubble-led growth. They just repealed trickle-down economics in Kansas because it was a disaster. What makes you think it will work this time?

BTW - I also think we can do away with an income tax and put in its place a carbon or "waste" tax. Taxation should be used to influence behavior, and we shouldn't "punish" good things like income. We should be punishing bad things like waste. A Carbon Tax addresses that issue.

 

[The Derp]

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

And what exactly is socialist in this country, or what is being proposed by liberals that would result in this? Nothing.

 

[Iceweasel]

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

And what exactly is socialist in this country, or what is being proposed by liberals that would result in this? Nothing.

Wrong. The bigger government gets the more control it exerts on the marketplace. Eventually companies can't meet the demands and only government can run it.

 

[whitehall]

Where were lefties during the eight years when "90% of Americans didn't fair well" during the Obama years? It's getting down right laughable that small minded lefties dig up the tired old trickle down argument only during republican administrations. Don't they think we notice?

 

[The Derp]

Wrong. The bigger government gets the more control it exerts on the marketplace.

Except that doesn't happen, and Medicare Part-D is the proof. If government gets more control to exert in the marketplace then Medicare would be able to use its leverage to negotiate for cheaper prescription drugs. But Conservatives prevented Medicare from doing that. Why? Don't you want cheaper drug prices? Why do you insist on paying through the nose for prescription drugs for no other reason than to protect the profits of pharmaceutical companies?

Eventually companies can't meet the demands and only government can run it.

A load of horseshit. You seem to be arguing here that the private sector cannot meet demands of the citizenry. If that's the case, then how exactly will cutting government solve that issue? You make no sense, pal.

 

[Iceweasel]

A load of horseshit. You seem to be arguing here that the private sector cannot meet demands of the citizenry. If that's the case, then how exactly will cutting government solve that issue? You make no sense, pal.

You omitted government mandates. I didn't say private business couldn't meet free market demands. You have no brain, pal.

 

[The Derp]

Where were lefties during the eight years when "90% of Americans didn't fair well" during the Obama years? It's getting down right laughable that small minded lefties dig up the tired old trickle down argument only during republican administrations. Don't they think we notice?

A better question would be where were the Conservatives during Obama's 8 years? All they did was obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. They offered nothing to improve the economy. In fact, they hurt it through Sequestration and shutting down the government in 2013.

 

[The Derp]

You omitted government mandates. I didn't say private business couldn't meet free market demands. You have no brain, pal.

Other than health insurance, what mandates are you talking about? Mandates for insurance is how you keep the costs for private insurance low. You get that, right? You understand how insurance works, right?

 

[Iceweasel]

You omitted government mandates. I didn't say private business couldn't meet free market demands. You have no brain, pal.

Other than health insurance, what mandates are you talking about? Mandates for insurance is how you keep the costs for private insurance low. You get that, right? You understand how insurance works, right?

The costs for insurance is not low, many people have had huge increases. The more government is involved the more complex and expensive things cost. Your theory is bogus. But I said nothing about insurance in particular, there's much more to an economy than that. Although it was a major first step.

 

[Iceweasel]

Where were lefties during the eight years when "90% of Americans didn't fair well" during the Obama years? It's getting down right laughable that small minded lefties dig up the tired old trickle down argument only during republican administrations. Don't they think we notice?

A better question would be where were the Conservatives during Obama's 8 years? All they did was obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. They offered nothing to improve the economy. In fact, they hurt it through Sequestration and shutting down the government in 2013.

Yes, thank god they obstructed the socialist asshole. Should have done more really.

 

[whitehall]

Where were lefties during the eight years when "90% of Americans didn't fair well" during the Obama years? It's getting down right laughable that small minded lefties dig up the tired old trickle down argument only during republican administrations. Don't they think we notice?

A better question would be where were the Conservatives during Obama's 8 years? All they did was obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. They offered nothing to improve the economy. In fact, they hurt it through Sequestration and shutting down the government in 2013.

Here it is again, lefties blaming conservatives for the eight years of negative growth during the Obama years. Barry Hussein vowed to shut down the fossil fuel industry while the rest of the world gobbled it up and we ended up with laughable bills like "cash for clunkers" and failed alternate energy corporations like Solyndra. Lefties kept their heads in the sand while Hillary sold uranium sites to Russia and accepted about a quarter of a million dollars each for a series of money laundering events disguised as speeches to Wall Street bankers. Meanwhile the democrat party ran socialist for president and their shrinking small minded base still manages to convince themselves that conservatives are the problem. No wonder they lost the presidency, both houses of congress, most governors and more than 3,000 state and local elections in less than a decade.

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism is state owned means of production. You don't even know what the word means.

And what exactly is socialist in this country, or what is being proposed by liberals that would result in this? Nothing.

Wrong. The bigger government gets the more control it exerts on the marketplace. Eventually companies can't meet the demands and only government can run it.

end our, nationally socialized drug war, right wingers.

 

[danielpalos]

Where were lefties during the eight years when "90% of Americans didn't fair well" during the Obama years? It's getting down right laughable that small minded lefties dig up the tired old trickle down argument only during republican administrations. Don't they think we notice?

I didn't see any non-voluntary Hoovervilles.