Kansas Rejects Trickle Down Economics

[Burning Hammer]

What is your evidence? Unsupported claims aren't really convincing, nor should you expect them to be.

There is no evidence, it isn't fucking real.

 

[Greoric]

I'm very familiar with the ideas of Crazy Uncle Milty, thank you.

*Gasp* How dare you??

 

[Greoric]

There is no evidence, it isn't fucking real.

Edit!

 

[Jim Bob]

Or my God, anything that's not neo-Keynesian or MMT drivel.

'm very familiar with the ideas of Crazy Uncle Milty, thank you.

Your hero got one thing right.

 

[Greoric]

Your hero got one thing right.

Beetlejuice. Beetlejuice @Jack V Savage

 

[ultramanhyata]

Trickle down does work but only on a global scale.

Rich investors will invest but have literally zero incentives to do so in the place that gave them the tax break.

So don't feel bad, your upper class tax cuts is helping lift rural Chinese people out of poverty.

I love how the same crowd that denies the zero-sum nature of economics will say the US worker unhappy about losing his $30 an hour factory job to outsourcing is trying to deny opportunity to impoverished, Chinese peasants.

In reality a tacit acknowledgment that it is either/or. Not both/and.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Your hero got one thing right.

I've never read a word of Keynes.

 

[Greoric]

I love how the same crowd that denies the zero-sum nature of economics will say the US worker unhappy about losing his $30 an hour factory job to outsourcing is trying to deny opportunity to impoverished, Chinese peasants.

In reality a tacit acknowledgment that it is either/or. Not both/and.

Can I correctly infer here that you think the zero sum nature of economics exists?

 

[RetiredWisFighter]

Do people understand that every state that has tried this has basically tanked the states economy.


Scott Walker did the same thing with similar results.

Walker is STILL doing it with disastrous results. Don't forget you need to attack public sectors too those rich teachers are a complete drain on society.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Because nothing helps working people quite as much as higher interest rates on home and auto loans.

Also bad for bonds, one of the safest portfolio investments.

But I guess the upside is the sweet 1% rates on savings and money market accounts.

And as far as increasing employment, raising wages or boosting stocks, the data is mixed, the outcomes far from clear.

The point of raising rates is to slow the economy down when it's growing too fast (and the most important signs of that are rising wages and rising inflation). The point of cutting them is to speed up the economy. The rate of change is what matters. The level is largely irrelevant, except that when you hit zero, you can no longer speed up the economy with rate cuts.

(Will give credit to @Jack V Savage for making me do some homework and rethink my position on the benefit of interest rate increases on workers.)

Thanks.

Not interested in one of your thread hijacks, son.

The discussion I'm having concerns whether or not the term "trickle down" is a euphemism used by critics to describe conventional supply-side economic philosophy.

As I pointed out earlier, "supply-side" itself is a euphemism. The idea is that growth can be constrained on the demand side (if not enough people are willing to spend money to ensure that we're using all of our resources, including labor) or on the supply side (if people are willing to spend money to buy goods and services but we're collectively unable to produce enough). There's a very clear test of what is holding us back--prices. Further, there are lots of "supply-side" options, but the term generally just refers to tax cuts for the rich and anti-consumer, anti-labor, or anti-environmental regulatory changes.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Look, excuse you. The thief that steals $50 dollars out of your wallet instead of $200 isn't giving you $150. He's just letting you keep $150.

Why? Because the thief didn't create that wealth. You did. The government didn't create the wealth it doesn't tax (read: steal). You did.

The implication here is that you produced all the value that you receive, which is obviously not the case. Production is a social process that involves nature, and distribution is a conventional process that involves laws.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Walker is STILL doing it with disastrous results. Don't forget you need to attack public sectors too those rich teachers are a complete drain on society.

It's happened in other states as well all with similar results

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Trickle down economics is a fraudulent theory designed by the mega rich and their think tanks. At a time of grotesque income inequality, the wealthy and their corporations do not need tax breaks.

Kansas Gov, the ironically named Sam Brownback, pushed tax cuts for the wealthy claiming it would stimulate the economy. The result? Kansas's economy grew even more slowly than the national average. Jobs did not come flooding in, but a billion dollar hole in the state budget did.


Now the state senate, including Republicans, wants to roll back the tax cuts.

Trickle down economics doesn't work, people.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/17/kansas-lawmakers-pass-big-income-tax-increase-as-budget-fix/

We will wait and see what happens.

 

[Buck Swope]

So liberals, did Reagan save Harley Davidson from bankruptcy?

The tariffs didn't really save H-D. The company itself did.

https://www.fool.com/investing/gene...-ago-today-tariffs-saved-harley-davidson.aspx

 

[ultramanhyata]

Walker is STILL doing it with disastrous results. Don't forget you need to attack public sectors too those rich teachers are a complete drain on society.

Average salary for public school teachers is about $50,000. For private it's about $36,000.

Those 10's of thousands of dollars the public school teachers are being overpaid need to be converted into profit for the owners of private schools.

Betsy DeVos intends to right this moral outrage. It's for the capitalists... I mean, it's for the children. The children. Of course.

 

[luckyshot]

When will you fucking idiots realize no economist uses the term trickle down economics and it's not a real fucking system.

When you realize that this has already been addressed multiple times in the thread that you clearly didn't read.

 

[HIMBOB]

Isn't it their incentive to invest where they see potential growth?

Exactly. Totally unrelated.

Hell if you consider it results in less money spent on consumption its probably a negative correlation.

 

[luckyshot]

What I'm a cherry picking? I was just reminding you that on top of the tax cuts and changes in regulation Reagan also had a lot of deficit spending, which helped stimulate the economy.

Cherry picking is when you look at facts other than the ones other side wants you to.

 

[Burning Hammer]

When you realize that this has already been addressed multiple times in the thread that you clearly didn't read.

Then why didn't you delete your shit thread?

 

[ultramanhyata]

The implication here is that you produced all the value that you receive, which is obviously not the case. Production is a social process that involves nature, and distribution is a conventional process that involves laws.

The layers of indoctrination will never allow people like Greoric to process this type of information.

I like to use the comparison of a painter and the owner of a picture frame factory.

The million dollars the painter might make from the sale of his painting is extracted from the economy very differently than the million dollars the factory owner might make at year's end from the sale of his company's frames.