I think you misunderstand what people mean when they say "trickle down economics" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
Republicans: I WARNED YOU.
- Thread starter Protectionist
- Start date
-
- Tags
- republicans warned
No misunderstanding at all and the 'tax cuts' mentioned by wiki there is another way of saying the wealthy were allowed to keep more of their own money. I think you misunderstand where money comes from in the first place, it's our money to begin with.
The government then for and by the people is supposed to tax in order to provide the common defense and promote the general welfare. The money.....all the wealth......belongs to We the People, is that not correct?
And wealth is...like it or not...historically been stacked in the upper 1 to 2 percent of our populations. Like it is today. Who are the 'evil rich' today for example? Are they not the top one or two percent who 'horde' wealth while the rest of us do without? What is the median income in America some 55,000?
Are we talking about the same thing?
The government then for and by the people is supposed to tax in order to provide the common defense and promote the general welfare. The money.....all the wealth......belongs to We the People, is that not correct?
And wealth is...like it or not...historically been stacked in the upper 1 to 2 percent of our populations. Like it is today. Who are the 'evil rich' today for example? Are they not the top one or two percent who 'horde' wealth while the rest of us do without? What is the median income in America some 55,000?
Are we talking about the same thing?
Progressive taxation is fairer from a libertarian (equality in process) standpoint in my opinion: http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3672
That is kind of off-topic though. Trickle down is about greater benefits to the rich always trickling down- this includes government contracts, bailouts, you name it. It isn't true. It is a silly political thing though. It isn't even economics. Read the wikipedia page and the criticism that even some Austrians and Chicago economists have had of it and how it hasn't really existed to a large extent to begin with.
That is kind of off-topic though. Trickle down is about greater benefits to the rich always trickling down- this includes government contracts, bailouts, you name it. It isn't true. It is a silly political thing though. It isn't even economics. Read the wikipedia page and the criticism that even some Austrians and Chicago economists have had of it and how it hasn't really existed to a large extent to begin with.
There you go again. "Greater benefits" that you use there myp, is nothing more than the wealthier of We the People keeping their own money. Progressive thought process very much considers not taxing the wealthy much more on the basis that they can afford it as a "benefit" those citizens are receiving. As if it's the government's money and allowing you to keep more than the average citizen makes is some kind of special favor or benefit.
Your opinion is absolutely and all wrong. And the anti-thesis of the building of America. The US had an income tax during the civil war, the Supreme Court ruled federal income taxes unconstitutional in 1895 I believe, we the smarter people of course amended our constitution in 1913 and never looked back.
Last edited:
You don't understand what I am saying. You don't think people should be taxed equally? I am saying a progressive tax does that.
No tax isn't an option unless you are an anarchist. You want a government? Guess, what- there will be some tax, so unless you are an anarchist you too are for some tax (or just deny reality).
A progressive tax does nothing of the sort and taxes wealthier incomes at a higher percentage. Your definition of equally I find odd.
I'm for some tax...given the fact that it's always remembered the money is ours........not any government's. A tax that provides for the common defense and helps the general welfare of our nation......but isn't looked at as if any tax cut is some kind of "benefit" as you believe it is. that is complete and utter nonsense in my opinion.
Since that is kind of off-topic here, I would say check out my posts in the thread I linked to above and we can continue the discussion there if you are interested. Nominal dollar figures aren't equally valued.
A tax cut is a relative benefit. But that is not the only one- like I said the bailouts, etc. Anyway, this is useless. There is NO trickle down theory or "reality" when it comes to economics. It is a political device that is derogatory and if you want to stand by it, so be it- you are probably one of the few in the world
No one can tell if tax cuts would work for sure because the government has never cut spending at the same time just my two scents.
just my two scents.
No one can tell if tax cuts would work for sure because the government has never cut spending at the same time
Agree.
We, here in America, do not have a tax problem. We have a spending problem.
Some questions for you
In how many months after the two-term Marxist, flexible with our enemies, president Barack Hussein Obama was elected did the nation lose 750,000 jobs per month?
He is a tyrant now. It is clear to most of us. Let us hope the Republican Congress stops the tyrant who temporarily occupies the White House.
Is this an example of new math? Do you merely accept what the administration feeds you? Can you show me the cuts? What programs have less money this year than last year? Defense?
In how many months before the two-term Marxist, flexible with our enemies, president Barack Hussein Obama was elected was the nation losing 750,000 jobs per month?
In how many months after the two-term Marxist, flexible with our enemies, president Barack Hussein Obama was elected did the nation lose 750,000 jobs per month?
From your foxhole the government creates jobs and wealth, right? Where does the money come from?
What has he done? For full disclosure I want him defeated. So back to my question. What has he done for the United States? He has encouraged massive theft from the next generation. I admit that. Has he done anything else?
Okay. So he nationalized a portion of the auto industry. He nationalized a portion of the banking and financial industries. He nationalized student loans. He and his minions, Reind and Pelosi rammed the affordable health care act down our throats. That is intended to set the stage for socialism.
He is a tyrant now. It is clear to most of us. Let us hope the Republican Congress stops the tyrant who temporarily occupies the White House.
And yet his writings spend a great deal of time working through the problems of the intermediate stage, the state-tyranny, the dictatorship of the proles. For some reason no one ever escapes the intermediate step.
The goal was to wreck capitalist, free-market economies and replace them with a perfectly just system. It is a utopian pipe dream.
Agreed (although I don't think it was a malignant goal towards free markets so much as just a utopian alternative dream). I'm no communist, but it was being misrepresented, so I was clarifying that.
The Collective Mindset
Other than the cronies that the Marxist rewards who else receives billions to "trickle down"?
Is it possible you have no understanding of freedom and of liberty? Is it possible that you are completely clueless about economic freedom? Is it possible that fyou do not believe that you should be able to decide for yourself while I decide for me...all without government intervention?
Is everything "collective" with you?
Other than the cronies that the Marxist rewards who else receives billions to "trickle down"?
Is it possible you have no understanding of freedom and of liberty? Is it possible that you are completely clueless about economic freedom? Is it possible that fyou do not believe that you should be able to decide for yourself while I decide for me...all without government intervention?
It certainly can't be said that trickle down economics did. TDE is associated with low taxation, and while we have had low taxation (on the rich) for the past 30 years, for 65 years before that, we had very high taxation on the rich, and those were our best economic years.
When we went to the trickle down nonsense of Reagan/Bush (28-31% tax on the rich) we had some f our worst economic years. So, to try to say that trickle down economics built the economy of the United States, would be preposterous idiocy.
The Marxist Goal
His conceit is that man could ever know enough to do centrally what each of us does individually.
Centralization is a very great evil.
Nice. But Marx was very specific in many of his writings about his goal to wreck capitalism. He believed it was fundamentally unfair. Don't you share his opinion?
His conceit is that man could ever know enough to do centrally what each of us does individually.
Centralization is a very great evil.
The Lies we tell one another
Can you explain how the tax revenues nearly doubled under Reagan's lower tax rates?
Would you share what the effective tax rates have been in the US for the last hundred years?
Can you explain how the tax revenues nearly doubled under Reagan's lower tax rates?
That employer will have money to pay his employees if he gets SALES in the stores. And those SALES are boosted by more AMERICANS working and spending their paychecks. And that (for one example) and quite well come from millions more AMERICANS getting jobs which came from the $$$ of increased taxation.
And I guess you just can't let go of that word "trickLe", but I guess you were referring to PERCOLATE UP ECONOMICS. With it, there's no great effort in going up at all. You just tax the people who can easily afford to pay. Hire lots of badly needed workers and you fix the economy with infrastructure repair, immigration control, crime control, etc) Get it ?
Over the past 60 years:
Best GDP growth and Job Growth were at 75-80% taxation on the rich (PERCOLATE UP ECONOMICS)
Close 2ND BEST Job & GDP Growth were at 91-94% taxation on the rich (PERCOLATE UP ECONOMICS)
Similar threads
