Has Trickle Down Economics Failed?

[Steelplate]

As you all know, I firmly believe it did. I liken it to another ideology based on optimism... Communism.

Trickle Down says "give the rich tax breaks and as they make more money, they will trickle it down to the working and Middle Class in the form of higher wages" basically making the idea of a Union to keep an employer honest as obsolete.

Communism says to share wealth equally with all members of society.

They are both flawed in the same way... they don't take into account one thing... Greed.

Communists don't take into the account the greed that people in power can have... therefore, Most Communist Countries tend to be Governmental Dictatorships that dupe the general Public into thinking they are getting their fair share, but those in power are almost always skimming for themselves and giving the general population less than their fair share.

Reaganomics does pretty much the same thing, except that it's not governmental greed that is the problem... it's Corporate, Trade and Banking Greed. Over the past 30 years(or post-Reagan), we've seen a downhill slide in the lives of the Average American. While we've seen Great money flowing into the upper echelon of our society... so in fact, they aren't trickling down like they did when Reagan first won the election on this simple, mostly sound idea.

 

[Mr Natural]

It hasn't completely failed yet, but it's on it's way.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I won't say it failed.

I will say it has never been proven to work.

 

[Steelplate]

No... at the time, I believed in it. I voted for Reagan in his second term(my first election as an adult), and in the very beginning... when everyone was playing along... it did work.

But as time went on, Big Money found out something... Trickling Down was optional... Once they figured that out... it's been a Corporatist wet dream ever since.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Big Money, eh, Dim? And what will you do with the big, big money?

 

[midcan5]

OMG you are going to confuse the wingnuts completely! Their worship of the wealthy and corporations may finally be thrown into doubt and without their gawds they will be lost, unhinged, disconnected from the very ground they worship. It will be a sad sight. Have a heart, tell them it really works so they can sleep tonight.

"Another great evil arising from this desire to be thought rich; or rather, from the desire not to be thought poor, is the destructive thing which has been honored by the name of "speculation"; but which ought to be called Gambling." William Cobbett

"This disposition to admire, and almost to worship , the rich and powerful, and to despise, or, at least neglect persons of poor and mean conditions...is...the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments." Adam Smith

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

One thing is for sure DIVIDE AND CONQUER is rolling right along.

 

[Mr Natural]

One thing is for sure DIVIDE AND CONQUER is rolling right along.

Yes it is!

The question is however, who's doing the dividing?

And why?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

One thing is for sure DIVIDE AND CONQUER is rolling right along.

Yes it is!

The question is however, who's doing the dividing?

And why?

A vast majority of congress with the president leading the way.

 

[Oddball]

No.

Reagan's so-called "trickle down" economic model called for cuts in gubmint spending and shrinking the bureaucracy, along with vastly lower tax rates.

You cannot call anything that hasn't even been tried a failure.

However, we do have plenty of evidence to show that Barry Obolshevik's "trickled on" economic program is a massive failure.

 

[Mr Natural]

One thing is for sure DIVIDE AND CONQUER is rolling right along.

Yes it is!

The question is however, who's doing the dividing?

And why?

A vast majority of congress with the president leading the way.

But congress doesn't act on it's own: it dances to the whims of big monied interests.

 

[Steelplate]

Big Money, eh, Dim? And what will you do with the big, big money?

Just to be clear... I use the moniker "big money" rather than to type out "large multi-billion dollar corporations, the Banking sector and wall street".

 

[oreo]

As you all know, I firmly believe it did. I liken it to another ideology based on optimism... Communism.

Trickle Down says "give the rich tax breaks and as they make more money, they will trickle it down to the working and Middle Class in the form of higher wages" basically making the idea of a Union to keep an employer honest as obsolete.

Communism says to share wealth equally with all members of society.

They are both flawed in the same way... they don't take into account one thing... Greed.

Communists don't take into the account the greed that people in power can have... therefore, Most Communist Countries tend to be Governmental Dictatorships that dupe the general Public into thinking they are getting their fair share, but those in power are almost always skimming for themselves and giving the general population less than their fair share.

Reaganomics does pretty much the same thing, except that it's not governmental greed that is the problem... it's Corporate, Trade and Banking Greed. Over the past 30 years(or post-Reagan), we've seen a downhill slide in the lives of the Average American. While we've seen Great money flowing into the upper echelon of our society... so in fact, they aren't trickling down like they did when Reagan first won the election on this simple, mostly sound idea.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance,and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."Winston Churchill

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Big Money, eh, Dim? And what will you do with the big, big money?

Just to be clear... I use the moniker "big money" rather than to type out "large multi-billion dollar corporations, the Banking sector and wall street".

And I use the name Dim because you remind me of the character from "Clockwork Orange" except he probably had a better handle on economics.

 

[Steelplate]

No.

Reagan's so-called "trickle down" economic model called for cuts in gubmint spending and shrinking the bureaucracy, along with vastly lower tax rates.

You cannot call anything that hasn't even been tried a failure.

However, we do have plenty of evidence to show that Barry Obolshevik's "trickled on" economic program is a massive failure.

Here is the synopsis of Trickle Down Economics... No where in this entire submission does it say anything about smaller government... that is the realm of your NEO Conservative agenda... not Trickle Down.

Trickle-down economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't often use wiki, but in this case... it gives an accurate description and both viewpoints(pro and con), so I used it.

 

[Steelplate]

Big Money, eh, Dim? And what will you do with the big, big money?

Just to be clear... I use the moniker "big money" rather than to type out "large multi-billion dollar corporations, the Banking sector and wall street".

And I use the name Dim because you remind me of the character from "Clockwork Orange" except he probably had a better handle on economics.

Let me guess, the huge gains in our wealthiest citizens and the stagnation and downsizing of our working class is an example of "trickle down" working as it should.

You call me Dim? I call you and your side's agenda a complete fraud.

 

[Oddball]

No.

Reagan's so-called "trickle down" economic model called for cuts in gubmint spending and shrinking the bureaucracy, along with vastly lower tax rates.

You cannot call anything that hasn't even been tried a failure.

However, we do have plenty of evidence to show that Barry Obolshevik's "trickled on" economic program is a massive failure.

Here is the synopsis of Trickle Down Economics... No where in this entire submission does it say anything about smaller government... that is the realm of your NEO Conservative agenda... not Trickle Down.

Trickle-down economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't often use wiki, but in this case... it gives an accurate description and both viewpoints(pro and con), so I used it.

Right off the bat:

"Trickle-down economics" and "the trickle-down theory" are pejorative terms...

Little wonder that whomsoever has done the explanation of the Reagan model would leave out the federal spending side of the equation.

Then again, those who wish to deem such things failures, when they weren't even tried in full measure, usually like to cherry pick their "facts".

 

[theHawk]

When has welfare redistribution ever worked?

And by the way, current tax cuts are all on Obama. He didn't need 1 repub vote and yet he chose to give the super rich a tax cut. So why you libs all worked up about the rich?

 

[Steelplate]

As you all know, I firmly believe it did. I liken it to another ideology based on optimism... Communism.

Trickle Down says "give the rich tax breaks and as they make more money, they will trickle it down to the working and Middle Class in the form of higher wages" basically making the idea of a Union to keep an employer honest as obsolete.

Communism says to share wealth equally with all members of society.

They are both flawed in the same way... they don't take into account one thing... Greed.

Communists don't take into the account the greed that people in power can have... therefore, Most Communist Countries tend to be Governmental Dictatorships that dupe the general Public into thinking they are getting their fair share, but those in power are almost always skimming for themselves and giving the general population less than their fair share.

Reaganomics does pretty much the same thing, except that it's not governmental greed that is the problem... it's Corporate, Trade and Banking Greed. Over the past 30 years(or post-Reagan), we've seen a downhill slide in the lives of the Average American. While we've seen Great money flowing into the upper echelon of our society... so in fact, they aren't trickling down like they did when Reagan first won the election on this simple, mostly sound idea.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance,and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."Winston Churchill


View attachment 14754

Let's see, we were talking about Supply Side Economics(Trickle Down), Socialism has no part of this discussion. Unless you believe that supply side is synonymous with Capitalism.... which it's not.

 

[Steelplate]

When has welfare redistribution ever worked?

And by the way, current tax cuts are all on Obama. He didn't need 1 repub vote and yet he chose to give the super rich a tax cut. So why you libs all worked up about the rich?

Why am I all worked up about the rich? Perhaps it's because they are ruining the country and propping up countries elsewhere... some of which are Communist countries.

But you think it's OK... Just shows what nutjobs you are. You SUPPORT "big money" to rob from our working class and give it to China's.

Ok... On the tax thing... You are correct. They only needed Democratic votes... Hey... REAL Republicans in the House only needed Republican Votes to not make the debt ceiling debate go down to the day of default and cause a downgrade in our credit rating... but the assholes from the Tea Party wants our country blown up anyway, so a default was no skin off their noses. Tea Party Republicans are the exact same thing as ultra liberals like Bernie Sanders and the Blue Dog Conservative Democrats.

the mainstream GOP, even though they outnumber the Tea Party, need their votes. it was the same with Obama's "bulletproof" Congress.... it never was bulletproof.