What is "Trickle Down Economics"?

[RKMBrown]

Taxi companies are another example. Localities issue medallions or licenses. So taxi rates are high. Of course contrary to what idiot Brown thinks, they are subject to competition, in this case from Uber and Lyft. Even monopolies face competition at times.

Where did I say monopolies don't face competition? Are you retarded?

Definition of 'Monopoly'

A situation in which a single company or group owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service. By definition, monopoly is characterized by an absence of competition, which often results in high prices and inferior products.

According to a strict academic definition, a monopoly is a market containing a single firm. In such instances where a single firm holds monopoly power, the company will typically be forced to divest its assets. Antimonopoly regulation protects free markets from being dominated by a single entity.

OK you have proven conclusively you dont know waht you're talking about. I cant deal with that level of ignorance. Bye.

IOW your puny mind can't conceive of the concept of percentages, portions, partial, attempted, etc. Your ok with the little guy being shit on and free markets being replaced primarily with mega corps that control the markets. Why is that?

 

[RKMBrown]

WTF are you blabbering about? Do you think there should be no patents, so a company that invests a billion dollars discovering a life saving drug should have the next drug company simply reverse engineer the thing and sell it without the same investment? Who in his right mind would do that?
How about music or books? Maybe just have unlimited pirating so no artist will ever make money from a royalty. That will sure make for a creative environment, right?
What the **** does QE money have to do with your credit union? With anything? You're just loading the boat with narco libertarian crap and spewing it, hoping something sticks.
There are no monopolies beyond the limited range I mentioned. I have been consistent in saying that. You are all over the ******* board hoping to find an example that sticks.

Where did I say there should be no patents or copyrights? Are you mentally handicapped? As for copyrights in particular, they were fine when they were the right to copy after some limited time span. However, now that they are UNLIMITED in length they are no longer copy rights they are permanent restrictions from copying anything the age of Micky Mouse or younger. As for patenting life, no we should not let our tax dollars and insurance payments be spent to invent life saving drugs that they overcharge for. What good is a lifesaving drug if it breaks the bank? That's government mandated wealth distribution to the drug oligopoly. Example, it costs tens of thousands of dollars for each round of anti-venom. It can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat you if you get bit by a snake. Anti-venom is old tech, nothing new. There is absolutely no excuse for this. Our government mandates which supplier of what drug we have to use, then ignores the overcharging. As I said, pick a market to discuss. You are the one that said there are no monopolies dumb ass.

Copyrights are not unlimited in length. They are limited to the life of the author plus 50 years.

You are too uninformed to argue with. You literatlly dont know what you dont know.

You are an IDIOT. Copyrights have been extended each and every time Mickey mouse came under risk of being put into the public domain. Look it up dumb ass. Do you need another link?

 

[The Rabbi]

^^Too ignorant and stupid to engage.

 

[RKMBrown]

^^Too ignorant and stupid to engage.

Face it you are just ignorant on this topic. Here's some reading:

15 years ago, Congress kept Mickey Mouse out of the public domain. Will they do it again? - The Washington Post

 

[Siete]

^^Too ignorant and stupid to engage.

yes Rabid you are. Why members afford you their time in beyond me.

 

[kaz]

The lefties here frequently mock "trickle down economics" as the cause of our slow economy. So what is trickle down economics? I want to hear an explanation. Snarky responses like "it's what the GOP believes" will be thrashed soundly.

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

 

[RKMBrown]

The lefties here frequently mock "trickle down economics" as the cause of our slow economy. So what is trickle down economics? I want to hear an explanation. Snarky responses like "it's what the GOP believes" will be thrashed soundly.

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

The goal of the marxists is to destroy our economy and replace it with socialism. They understand they can't win when we are strong. How can you argue change when things are going along fine? Rules for Radicals is working for them. Face it, they are winning.

 

[Siete]

Great. Another clod that sees things in black and white.

Even under your scenario of how horrible life is in a semi Capitalist country, people still start businesses, make a lot of money, take great care of their loved ones, move on and do other things after the realization all that money isn't what it's cracked up to be, and continue to be very happy with their lives and their accomplishments without giving a shit about all that power.

Have both parties engaged in crony capitalism? Absolutely. But those of us who don't whine about "the man" the way you do can still do just fine if we put our minds to it, while also working hard to try to change the system.

You know....like getting on message boards and trying to educate the brainwashed and moronic that can be found glorifying Socialism and collectivism.

Hey econchick, are there such people as "plutocrats? Have you ever run across what the definition of a "plutocracy" is. You know; government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
Ever heard that before?

Have there ever been ultra rich people from around the world that have conspired to become even more rich and powerful?

But those people and their desires don't exist today. Is that what you want to claim?
Ever read any history?

Indeed.....under Obama, the big banks are kicking ass!!! Never done better!!


Its a bonanza!!!!!!!!

Just have the Fed keep printing.......and printing.......and printing.......and printing.......and printing.


No Ponzi scheme here!!!



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/business/big-banks-still-a-risk.html?ref=business&_r=2&utm_campaign=morning%20scan-aug%204%202014&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&ET=americanbanker%3Ae2895301%3A758211a%3A&st=email


Too Big to Fail Has NOT Ended ... It's Only Gotten WORSE Washington's Blog

I was under the impression Democrats destroyed the Financial Industry with regulations.

Finance thrives under the Obama Admin... how horrible.

 

[Siete]

The lefties here frequently mock "trickle down economics" as the cause of our slow economy. So what is trickle down economics? I want to hear an explanation. Snarky responses like "it's what the GOP believes" will be thrashed soundly.

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

 

[RKMBrown]

Hey econchick, are there such people as "plutocrats? Have you ever run across what the definition of a "plutocracy" is. You know; government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
Ever heard that before?

Have there ever been ultra rich people from around the world that have conspired to become even more rich and powerful?

But those people and their desires don't exist today. Is that what you want to claim?
Ever read any history?

Indeed.....under Obama, the big banks are kicking ass!!! Never done better!!


Its a bonanza!!!!!!!!

Just have the Fed keep printing.......and printing.......and printing.......and printing.......and printing.


No Ponzi scheme here!!!



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/business/big-banks-still-a-risk.html?ref=business&_r=2&utm_campaign=morning%20scan-aug%204%202014&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&ET=americanbanker%3Ae2895301%3A758211a%3A&st=email


Too Big to Fail Has NOT Ended ... It's Only Gotten WORSE Washington's Blog

I was under the impression Democrats destroyed the Financial Industry with regulations.

Finance thrives under the Obama Admin... how horrible.

The regulations went after small banks, credit unions, etc. that did not buy into what caused the recession. The QE stuff and the checks being written to cover bankruptcies were to benefit the bigger cartel banks and government run financing programs that failed but were deemed to big to fail. But don't worry the big banks are getting their bonuses while the small guys are being starved out.

 

[The Rabbi]

^^Too ignorant and stupid to engage.

Face it you are just ignorant on this topic. Here's some reading:

15 years ago, Congress kept Mickey Mouse out of the public domain. Will they do it again? - The Washington Post

How is any of that even relevant to this discussion? You shift topics when shown you dont know anything.
The fact is that outside of some limited areas there are no monopolies. Being a narco-libertarian, your views are basically identical to those of liberals: BIG SCARY EEVUL corporations are conspiring to keep you down.

 

[RKMBrown]

^^Too ignorant and stupid to engage.

Face it you are just ignorant on this topic. Here's some reading:

15 years ago, Congress kept Mickey Mouse out of the public domain. Will they do it again? - The Washington Post

How is any of that even relevant to this discussion? You shift topics when shown you dont know anything.
The fact is that outside of some limited areas there are no monopolies. Being a narco-libertarian, your views are basically identical to those of liberals: BIG SCARY EEVUL corporations are conspiring to keep you down.

You said I was wrong on copyrights, ya dumb ass. I provided you proof, ya dumb ass. Is there any other topic regarding intellectual property rights being used to provide limited monopolies to hurt US Consumers that I can be of assistance to you for? Or are you still trying to prove how stupid your statement was that there is no such thing as monopolies and oligopolies in this country?

 

[kaz]

The lefties here frequently mock "trickle down economics" as the cause of our slow economy. So what is trickle down economics? I want to hear an explanation. Snarky responses like "it's what the GOP believes" will be thrashed soundly.

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

 

[RKMBrown]

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

Cheaper labor is good for investors and bad for labor. It can be good for labor if they get promoted into managing the cheaper labor,.. or if they are the investor that profits from getting themselves fired. Reagan's plan was to move American labor from low tech labor to high tech labor jobs. That worked right up till India and China trained tens of millions of high tech labor workers willing to work for minimum wage. The only saving grace is that robotics and automation may actually get us to world where work is a nice to have, and the robots provide us with the stuff we need to live on.

 

[kaz]

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

Cheaper labor is good for investors and bad for labor. It can be good for labor if they get promoted into managing the cheaper labor,.. or if they are the investor that profits from getting themselves fired. Reagan's plan was to move American labor from low tech labor to high tech labor jobs. That worked right up till India and China trained tens of millions of high tech labor workers willing to work for minimum wage. The only saving grace is that robotics and automation may actually get us to world where work is a nice to have, and the robots provide us with the stuff we need to live on.

Certainly for the labor directly impacted, offshoring jobs is not necessarily good for them. However, that isn't true of labor overall, in fact quite the reverse.

- Competitors domestically and internationally are offshoring and if the company doesn't stay competitive it risks everyone's jobs.

- Jobs are created in offshoring, you don't just move jobs offshore. You redesign processes and that creates frequently higher end better paying jobs here to manage the process.

- It helps the economy by increasing efficiency, people get more for the same money.

- It builds the economy of foreign countries creating additional markets.

If we still had blacksmiths now, they would like it, but it wouldn't be good for jobs as they are harming the economy performing inefficient tasks.

 

[Siete]

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

Oh, you have an MBA. Then let me explain it to you.

Creating prosperity in other countries at the expense of American workers robs this country of revenue on all levels. Jobs shipped overseas are GONE forever. Money that was being spent here that stimulated the economy no longer exists... there's the trickle down economy in a nutshell.

 

[Lakhota]

Trickle down is a misnomer. It's flood down. When we don't rape and plunder job providers, we provide lots of jobs, then we bid up good employees.

What the left support is trickle up poverty where government regulates jobs offshore and into automation and reduces the customer base for businesses.

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

Whoa, an MBA. Well, I'm a retired executive from the private and public sectors, with an MBA, and I think you're full of shit.

 

[RKMBrown]

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

Cheaper labor is good for investors and bad for labor. It can be good for labor if they get promoted into managing the cheaper labor,.. or if they are the investor that profits from getting themselves fired. Reagan's plan was to move American labor from low tech labor to high tech labor jobs. That worked right up till India and China trained tens of millions of high tech labor workers willing to work for minimum wage. The only saving grace is that robotics and automation may actually get us to world where work is a nice to have, and the robots provide us with the stuff we need to live on.

Certainly for the labor directly impacted, offshoring jobs is not necessarily good for them. However, that isn't true of labor overall, in fact quite the reverse.

- Competitors domestically and internationally are offshoring and if the company doesn't stay competitive it risks everyone's jobs.

- Jobs are created in offshoring, you don't just move jobs offshore. You redesign processes and that creates frequently higher end better paying jobs here to manage the process.

- It helps the economy by increasing efficiency, people get more for the same money.

- It builds the economy of foreign countries creating additional markets.

If we still had blacksmiths now, they would like it, but it wouldn't be good for jobs as they are harming the economy performing inefficient tasks.

Can you name the sectors that are not being offshored and onshored? Can you name the types of jobs that are not being minimized by these policies? Other than Government leadership...

When they immigrated migrants to pick farms... I was silent cause I did not pick fruit. When they offshored production... i was silent cause I did not work in production. When they offshored and h1b visa'd high tech jobs... I was silent cause I benefited from that because I'm a management consultant for the managers that are getting bonuses to right size payroll. When they came for MBA jobs I was shocked that our government is paying corporations to move my job off shore and import MBAs from India and no one gives a shit that I'm getting paid what amounts to minimum professional wages now.

 

[Siete]

those jobs packed up and went offshore... why didn't trickle down/supply side keep them in this country ?

oh wait, it's never worked in 50 years why should it work now ? RW's have magic wand.

Offshoring jobs is great for our economy and creating jobs on shore. But then I'm an MBA in finance who spent my career in management and management consulting and you're a mouthpiece who parrots socialist politicians, so obviously you know better.

I'll explain it to you if you can demonstrate you actually care about truth. I'm not bothering now because you pretty consistently demonstrate you don't.

Whoa, an MBA. Well, I'm a retired executive from the private and public sectors, with an MBA, and I think you're full of shit.

as do I.

"Only fools will continue clinging to the premise that outsourcing is good for America."

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. His latest book, “How The Economy Was Lost,” has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press.



former Secretary of Treasury under Reagan OR some dolt on a message board sporting an MBA ... gee, let me ponder that one.

 

[Lakhota]

Corporations, beholding to stake/stockholders, simply look for the cheapest labor and taxes - and they don't give a shit where they find it.