Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The mindset behind trickle down economics in the US

Page 9 of 11 [ 161 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

10 Aug 2019, 5:53 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


I don't follow your train of thought. Workers, disabled or not, will have more buying power and thus everyone's piece of the pie will grow. In the end, it's not work productivity but buying power that drives the economy in my limited understanding of economics.

Businesses hire people because they think it will help them increase profits.

A government unfunded mandate like the minimum wage, may make workers not worth hiring, because the business can't profit off them.

So, Democrats and Republicans will never push mandated compensation up that high.


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

10 Aug 2019, 5:54 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

10 Aug 2019, 6:04 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.

I am all for exploiting government programs.

A good capitalist doesn't look a gift horse in the mouth. They find ways for government to build their football stadiums, commercial developments, get "corporate welfare" ….

I strategize on may taxes to maximize my gains.

I find ways for other people to avoid taxes such as opening standard IRAs.

When markets that are not free, expect there to be winners and losers, the winners will likely be the people who can exploit the system.

Image


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Antrax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,639
Location: west coast

10 Aug 2019, 6:22 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.


So the counter question here? If the government GI Bill is so great for getting a college education why do millions of students use the free market solution of taking out loans, and going into debt instead?


_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

10 Aug 2019, 6:34 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.

I am all for exploiting government programs.

A good capitalist doesn't look a gift horse in the mouth. They find ways for government to build their football stadiums, commercial developments, get "corporate welfare" ….

I strategize on may taxes to maximize my gains.

I find ways for other people to avoid taxes such as opening standard IRAs.

When markets that are not free, expect there to be winners and losers, the winners will likely be the people who can exploit the system.

Image


In other words, you're fine with the government taking money from people and giving it to you, but not the government taking your money and giving it to other people.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Aug 2019, 6:35 pm

Antrax wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.


So the counter question here? If the government GI Bill is so great for getting a college education why do millions of students use the free market solution of taking out loans, and going into debt instead?


Probably because you'd have to go into the military, which is what the GI Bill is for.

So why don't more people go into the military?

Well, 71% of young people are unqualified to go into the military, according to a report this year:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 665840002/

In addition, people might have other reasons not to go into the military.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

10 Aug 2019, 6:37 pm

Antrax wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.


So the counter question here? If the government GI Bill is so great for getting a college education why do millions of students use the free market solution of taking out loans, and going into debt instead?


Because getting the Post 9-11 GI Bill involves committing yourself to the military for a number of years and allowing them to order you to go die if the situation calls for it.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

10 Aug 2019, 6:41 pm

Truthfully, I was in the military because my step dad kicked me out when I was 17, and I was low IQ, and not functioning well.

He would put military mail in my room as suggestions that I needed to leave.

In the military I was a failure, and many people made fun of me because of perceived low IQ. They made marching chants making fun of me ... "lost in the sauce".


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Antrax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,639
Location: west coast

10 Aug 2019, 6:54 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
Antrax wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


What I'm struggling to understand is, you've stated before that you were in the military, and put yourself through college using the Post 9-11 GI Bill.

These are government programs where money is taken from people, without their consent, and reallocated to you. Please explain why you needed to rely on a government program to elevate yourself if the "free market" is so great.


So the counter question here? If the government GI Bill is so great for getting a college education why do millions of students use the free market solution of taking out loans, and going into debt instead?


Because getting the Post 9-11 GI Bill involves committing yourself to the military for a number of years and allowing them to order you to go die if the situation calls for it.


So would you say the cost of student loan debts is lower than the cost of committing yourself to the military for a couple years?


_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."


Roboto
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 22 Jul 2019
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 336

10 Aug 2019, 7:38 pm

Antrax wrote:
Roboto wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Mostly trickle down is BS because the people who are expected to allow wealth to trickle down hide it all in foreign bank accounts. You see the uber wealthy elites are beyond human responsibility, they shouldn't pay taxes or contribute to the economy they should hoard all their money and pass it on to their groomed children who never have worked a day of hard labor. And then have the audacity to pretend those well groomed children are more valuble than people who make their money doing actual labor.


You really don't get it. Wealthy elites don't hoard money, they invest it. Why let your fortune shrink when instead it can grow. Invested money is directly funneled into the economy.

What you state is not fact, it's opinion and it ignores a 50 year trend of the middle class needing more labor hours necessary to sustain their quality of life.


I'm really starting to get upset here. I have repeatedly cited reliable statistics from the US census and CBO demonstrating how the middle class makes 26% more in inflation adjusted income and 44% more when adjusted for household size than 40 years ago.


Inflation is a flawed statistic (doesn't account food and energy/oil costs) and the study doesn't take into account labor hours of a household. Sure, middle class household incomes may be increasing but labor hours should be accounted for. These are flawed studies.



wowiexist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Nov 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 659
Location: Dallas, TX

10 Aug 2019, 7:53 pm

Roboto wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Roboto wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Mostly trickle down is BS because the people who are expected to allow wealth to trickle down hide it all in foreign bank accounts. You see the uber wealthy elites are beyond human responsibility, they shouldn't pay taxes or contribute to the economy they should hoard all their money and pass it on to their groomed children who never have worked a day of hard labor. And then have the audacity to pretend those well groomed children are more valuble than people who make their money doing actual labor.


You really don't get it. Wealthy elites don't hoard money, they invest it. Why let your fortune shrink when instead it can grow. Invested money is directly funneled into the economy.

What you state is not fact, it's opinion and it ignores a 50 year trend of the middle class needing more labor hours necessary to sustain their quality of life.


I'm really starting to get upset here. I have repeatedly cited reliable statistics from the US census and CBO demonstrating how the middle class makes 26% more in inflation adjusted income and 44% more when adjusted for household size than 40 years ago.


Inflation is a flawed statistic (doesn't account food and energy/oil costs) and the study doesn't take into account labor hours of a household. Sure, middle class household incomes may be increasing but labor hours should be accounted for. These are flawed studies.


Plus that particular statistic refers to the middle class and statistics show that the middle class is gradually shrinking. The wages that do not increase as much are now classified as lower class.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,783
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Aug 2019, 8:23 pm

Antrax wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


I don't follow your train of thought. Workers, disabled or not, will have more buying power and thus everyone's piece of the pie will grow. In the end, it's not work productivity but buying power that drives the economy in my limited understanding of economics.


I can see how you would come to believe that, but it's actually backwards. Buying power comes from productivity. Increased productivity decreases costs which decreases prices. Decreased prices result in increased buying power.


And a happy worker is a productive worker. Make someone work for a wage which gives them little buying power, under draconian workplace rules and no guarantee that the job will be there tomorrow, and with no benefits to rely on, and you'll have mediocre productivity.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

10 Aug 2019, 10:25 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


I don't follow your train of thought. Workers, disabled or not, will have more buying power and thus everyone's piece of the pie will grow. In the end, it's not work productivity but buying power that drives the economy in my limited understanding of economics.


I can see how you would come to believe that, but it's actually backwards. Buying power comes from productivity. Increased productivity decreases costs which decreases prices. Decreased prices result in increased buying power.


And a happy worker is a productive worker. Make someone work for a wage which gives them little buying power, under draconian workplace rules and no guarantee that the job will be there tomorrow, and with no benefits to rely on, and you'll have mediocre productivity.

yes, those are called "McJobs".

McJob
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McJob


However, typically, McJob labor is easily replaced, so it's not likely to be a problem for the employer.


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Aug 2019, 10:41 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


I don't follow your train of thought. Workers, disabled or not, will have more buying power and thus everyone's piece of the pie will grow. In the end, it's not work productivity but buying power that drives the economy in my limited understanding of economics.


I can see how you would come to believe that, but it's actually backwards. Buying power comes from productivity. Increased productivity decreases costs which decreases prices. Decreased prices result in increased buying power.


And a happy worker is a productive worker. Make someone work for a wage which gives them little buying power, under draconian workplace rules and no guarantee that the job will be there tomorrow, and with no benefits to rely on, and you'll have mediocre productivity.

yes, those are called "McJobs".

McJob
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McJob


However, typically, McJob labor is easily replaced, so it's not likely to be a problem for the employer.


No it is typically more of a problem for the employee.


_________________
We won't go back.


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

10 Aug 2019, 10:51 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


I don't follow your train of thought. Workers, disabled or not, will have more buying power and thus everyone's piece of the pie will grow. In the end, it's not work productivity but buying power that drives the economy in my limited understanding of economics.


I can see how you would come to believe that, but it's actually backwards. Buying power comes from productivity. Increased productivity decreases costs which decreases prices. Decreased prices result in increased buying power.


And a happy worker is a productive worker. Make someone work for a wage which gives them little buying power, under draconian workplace rules and no guarantee that the job will be there tomorrow, and with no benefits to rely on, and you'll have mediocre productivity.

yes, those are called "McJobs".

McJob
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McJob


However, typically, McJob labor is easily replaced, so it's not likely to be a problem for the employer.


No it is typically more of a problem for the employee.

More of a problem for the employee, definitely.

However, McJob labor is "Unskilled" labor, where a worker brings no skills to the employer.

So, the employer should have an easier time replacing McJob workers.

Image


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,783
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Aug 2019, 11:12 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or the government can step in to raise wages and make sure that benefits are provided.
Most people seriously don't want to be rich, just to live comfortably and without worry. That's the real American dream.

The government can't mandate worker productivity (e.g., some people may have disabilities).

So, Democrats and Republicans will never do that.


I don't follow your train of thought. Workers, disabled or not, will have more buying power and thus everyone's piece of the pie will grow. In the end, it's not work productivity but buying power that drives the economy in my limited understanding of economics.


I can see how you would come to believe that, but it's actually backwards. Buying power comes from productivity. Increased productivity decreases costs which decreases prices. Decreased prices result in increased buying power.


And a happy worker is a productive worker. Make someone work for a wage which gives them little buying power, under draconian workplace rules and no guarantee that the job will be there tomorrow, and with no benefits to rely on, and you'll have mediocre productivity.

yes, those are called "McJobs".

McJob
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McJob


However, typically, McJob labor is easily replaced, so it's not likely to be a problem for the employer.


Even people with so called "Mcjobs" have families they support, and contribute to the economy with their buying power.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer