The mindset behind trickle down economics in the US

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

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
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: 1,443
Location: Midwest

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: 44
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: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 642
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: 41,325
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: 6,190
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
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,942
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.


_________________
Welcome to hell, this is the end.


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
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: 41,325
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


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,942
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Aug 2019, 11:14 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
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


Well good for them I suppose, probably does make life easier for an employer if they can treat their emplyees like expendable easily replaceable objects.


_________________
Welcome to hell, this is the end.


Antrax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,443
Location: Midwest

10 Aug 2019, 11:59 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.


There's a lot of evidence that happy workers are more productive. However, there's an increase cost to providing to increasing wages, benefits etc. Merely mandating wage increases doesn't give workers extra buying power.

Not all employers treat their employees in an optimal fashion, however in general market competition tends to optimize these things.

For example if McDonalds is hurting their productivity by not paying their workers more, then Burger King could pay their workers more and gain a competitive edge.


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


Antrax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,443
Location: Midwest

11 Aug 2019, 12:04 am

Kraichgauer 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.


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


This is a pet peeve of mine. Not every job needs to be a family of four supporting job, in fact it is detrimental to the economy to force all jobs to being family of four supporting jobs.

Libertarian economists are fond of saying "the real minimum wage is 0." This is because if companies can't support workers at a certain minimum wage they cut workers and people who used to have jobs become unemployed. Unemployed people make 0.


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


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,325
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Aug 2019, 1:34 am

Antrax wrote:
Kraichgauer 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.


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


This is a pet peeve of mine. Not every job needs to be a family of four supporting job, in fact it is detrimental to the economy to force all jobs to being family of four supporting jobs.

Libertarian economists are fond of saying "the real minimum wage is 0." This is because if companies can't support workers at a certain minimum wage they cut workers and people who used to have jobs become unemployed. Unemployed people make 0.


Yet plenty of people working Mcjobs do have families. It's a matter of empathy that too many businesses seems to have a deficiency with.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


blazingstar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2017
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,227

11 Aug 2019, 9:24 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
blazingstar wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
How do we teach poor people to live below their means, save and invest their money ?

That's how we lift them up.

Image


How many poor people and families do you know intimately? If you are relying on news reports and the horrors that come to light in criminal events, you know nothing of the others who do work hard. And still there is not enough money to feed the family. In my work, I see and get to know a lot of them and see their struggles. I am guessing that all the people who espouse "just work harder" wouldn't last a minute in the conditions these people live.

Let's just take an adult with a disability, say someone with autism. His disability prevents him from working. Social Security benefits for someone who is getting SSI is $750/month.

You tell me how he pays rent, buys food, buys clothes, pays for someone to drive him to stores or doctor's appointments, and then saves money on that $750/month.

Even someone working at minimum wage would be hurting and it has been demonstrated the even a person educated and with previous success cannot get through a year on minimum wage jobs.

Your (editorially) attitude is to blame the poor for their plight. Relieves you (editorially) of any responsibility for the society you live in and from which you benefit.

The path to wealth is clear; save and invest.

Terrible sacrifices must be made if the budget is so low.

For inspiration, I suggest you watch some Dave Ramsey videos …

How Do I Succeed Financially When I'm Medically Disabled?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4h4Oqu22GU

What Dave Ramsey Recommends When Someone Is On Disability
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJJ428qYtj0

There's A Difference Between Poor And Broke - Dave Ramsey Rant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdnhKJG6bYk


A 100 Dave Ramsey videos are not going to help people who are truly poor. I'm sure you don't mean it, but your direction for sacrifice more is so disrespectful to people truly in poverty and those people who work in the field. As far as I can tell, the only people who can maintain this attitude are those who have no idea what it is like, on the ground. More information on your point of few will not help anyone at the bottom. What you don't understand is that what ever wealth and rights you have, are an accident of birth. Put someone with this attitude down somewhere else and that person would be scrambling.


_________________
Eyes that watch the morning star
usually shine brighter,
Arms held out to dark they say,
usually hold tighter.


Threnody, Dorothy Parker
as modified by David Tamulovich


blazingstar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2017
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,227

11 Aug 2019, 9:43 am

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.


Antrax, I am really interested in your numbers and how they do (or don't) describe the state of the economic disparity between the wealthy and the poor. I can't quarrel with your numbers, because I don't have the background for that. But I don't understand how it explains what I see happening right how.

My maternal grandparents: My grandfather worked a single job, as a bank teller. From this salary, he was able to buy a house, support my grandmother and my mother in a decent respectable lifestyle. Not rich, but comfortable.

My parents, both my parents had degrees from University of Chicago. And my mother never worked outside the home until after the divorce. But we never had enough money, even when my father was working in a professional job. They had only one car. He took the train into work when my mother needed it to shop.

In my generation, one worker cannot support a family. I realize you said not everyone will support a family, but most people do. Two professionals can barely support a family. Yes, some could do better if they used Dave Ramsey or Susie whatever to manage their money better. But the fact is that two generations ago, one worker in a regular job, could buy a house and support a family.

Now many young couples can't even dream of owning their own home.

What changed? How do your statistics explain this phenomenon? If everything financial is "the same" or even improved, why aren't we (the middle and lower classes) doing better than we are?


_________________
Eyes that watch the morning star
usually shine brighter,
Arms held out to dark they say,
usually hold tighter.


Threnody, Dorothy Parker
as modified by David Tamulovich