Trickle down economics, everyone!

trickle down economics, everyone!

100% correct. But unfortunately, there are retards conservatives living amongst us.

The rich do not get rich by making you poorer.

>unstack the glasses
>place glasses in swimming pool side by side
When you get a loan whose money do you think that is fucko?

This image also implies we shouldn't be importing new foreign glasses if we cannot even provide for the glasses that are from here.

Actually they do. Unless you think their wealth comes from fairy dust and oxygen molecules.

"Trickle down economics" exists only in the minds of leftists. It was never an economic theory advanced by anyone. It's a strawman.

Typical fucking leaf doesn't know basic economics and comes to a thread based in economics. You're a fucking piece of shit and this is why everyone hates you.

Do you supposed that there is the same amount of total wealth now as there was 20 years ago or 100 years ago, only its in different hands?

This is also how communism works.

>liberals actually believe that a glass of wine can magically get bigger
Pottery

Puncture the bottom of the top retards.

You grow your real economy (not your nominal GDP) by increasing production. When you grow your real economy, everyone, even the poorest, is better off than before.

Do you expect to grow your production capabilities by throwing money at those who do not produce? Please take the time to read about economics before posting.

fixed that for you

see
leafs possibly saved?

>t.socialist cuck

get your own wine Moron

KILL RICH PEOPLE
GET RICH
GET KILLED

Even if the government gave all the money to the poorest of people, the rich would have it before nightfall. Frankly, it doesn't matter who you hand out money too, it's all going to be the same in the end. Those who are retarded will lose it, and those who have any shred of sensibility will be able to suck it up.

...

>50 years ago
>average Joe has shit 13" black and white TV, no air conditioning, cell phone doesn't even exist

>now
>average Joe has 3 60" televisions, a super computer which he carries in his pocket, central air pretty much standard even in low cost apartments

and that's just a few examples

Wtf you swung me. Time to implement communism large scale, amirite?

Hey nigger, where do rich get their money? By selling services/products to other people. Seeing as most people aren't exactly rich, they are getting the money from the poor. Therefore the wealth the rich get is indeed from the poor people, unless there is some fucking 5th dimension where they pull their bills that i am not aware of

>hurr durr a fukin leaf, lololololoo

People who disagree with "trickle-down" economics still somehow believe that money printing, stimulus and forcing down interest rates will help. It's like clockwork. Fucking morons.

>Seeing as most people aren't exactly rich, they are getting the money from the poor.
Where do you think poor people get their money from?

Is this satire?

Where do the poor get their money? Working for the rich.
The rich have their money mostly in assets. Letting the rich keep their money is supposed to have them invest in companies allowing them to hire more workers and creating companies providing jobs to poor people.
According to you money does just come out of thin air if this isn't where it comes from. Oh, you're on the Canadian version of welfare aren't you?

this. Only leftists think the purpose of tax policy is redistributing wealth

Are you aware "Trickle down" is a meme made in the 90s to criticize Reagan's economic policies.

Who builds the homes for the rich? And everything that goes into building that home? That's how trickle down actually works. The rich use/need services and others move in to an area to provide those and they have their own needs.

this. Only leftists think the purpose of tax policy is redistributing wealth

underrated lol

This is correct.

DELET THIS

THAT'S IT
TAXES 100%

>what actually happens
>Rich never spend money

>The rich do not get rich by making you poorer.
Labor produces wealth. Nearly all that wealth is re-distributed to the capital owners, with very little of the additional wealth created going to the labor directly responsible for it. The father of modern capitalism, Adam Smith, noted that this would be a continuing problem for capitalism unless labor was able to keep enough of the wealth it created to sustain a healthy society.

The empty glasses also die for israel

Yes they do when we're told we'll benefit from their trickle down plan.
It never trickles down, why would they pay workers more? They're keeping their tax cut savings for another yacht.

I don’t get it. Do these people think that the rich put their money in ahole and leave it there?

trickle down economics is a fucking meme created by a leftist journalist trying to make fun of stuff he didnt like. at no point in history did anyone say 'lol the wealth will trickle down, trust us' in any serious economically minded capacity.

Yes, this is how communism works.

Why do you think this is some silver bullet to the argument that the name is different? This is like me saying "Interview with a Vampire sucked" and you going 'A-HA! It's called Interview with THE Vampire! therefore it doesn't suck!'

Imagine OP's post again.
> supply side economics, everyone!

Because that's what the rich does

Why don't the poor try to build businesses or work for themselves? All these big businesses started from somewhere.

...

It could work if chinks didnt produce shit so cheap

dont worry goy it'll trickle

We should set the corporate tax rate to 0% and replace it with a wealth tax and land value tax. All problems would go away.

I know this is bait but whatever. You do realize the rich people are usually the most productive ones right?

>makes this thread every fucking day
>get BTFO every single day

>labor theory of value

The term is just a leftist slur for any plan that lowers taxes. It is used without regard for what the specifics of the plan actually are.

Additionally, the unspoken premise of the leftist objection is that people have too much money and should not have more. Not just the rich, though they'll concede that they think the rich have too much if asked. They also believe the middle class has too much money. This is because they have a childish worldview where all economics is a zero-sum game and all people have equal ability, so the poor are a result of exploitation rather than their own decisions.

The truly exploited are the middle class, who form this countries main consumer base and who pay out disproportionately high taxes. The trouble is that the middle class benefits from reduced taxes on the rich in a way that the poor do not, because they have the aptitude to take advantage of opportunities for upward mobility. Likewise, they're hurt when taxes cause capital flight, disproportionately more than either the rich or poor. But again, according to leftists, they have too much money and are exploiting the poor.

Finally, it's worth pointing out that upward mobility for the poor is still very strong in the US, and always has been. Literally all you have to do is not have kids out of wedlock, not get into drugs or gangs, and be able to read and do arithmetic.

>This
The people who are against "trickle-down" economics are usually fucking retards and only hate it because CNN tells them it's bad.

I'm sure it doesn't have to do with rising globalism and moving work to shitholes :^)
>January 1st 1979:The United States and the People's Republic of China establish full diplomatic relations.

This illustrates corporate welfare accurately.

They do.

Resources are limited, for them to get richer they have to get more resources, that means less resources available for the poor.

Now add the fact that rich people can invest more than poor people and the ammount of resources a rich person can get is exponentially higher than what a poor person can get.

Poor people can get resources, but rich people can get more resources faster, and in an enviroment with limited resources that means the poor will stay poor and the rich will get richer.

You’re right that wealthy people have a lot more options to dodge taxes. But that doesn’t mean their wealth just sits in a vaylt all day. If it’s in a bank it’s being loaned out otherwise it’s an asset that is probably invested in the real economy like stocks.
A cool financial move is that you can have money offshore and then get a loan locally backwd by the offshore money to use it at home without paying takes. Eitherway rich people of all people know that you don’t get rich by stuffing your mattress. Maybe it doesn’t trickle down for you lazy wagecucks because you lack the ambition and dedication to make yourself into someone that can produce valuable stuff for society.

No ..no you're wrong
The rich have giant rooms filled with gold and treasure that they keep locked up and swim around in it like Scrooge McDuck

The money will trickle down to you some day goy!

To expand on this:
>April 15 1981:The first Coca-Cola bottling plant in China is opened.
>pepsi also enter the chinese market the same year

Oh look it's a "the rich are all like Smaug and just horde their wealth which never gets spent or invested on anything making its way back into the economy" episode

>meaningless graphs with no source

>making its way back into the other wealthy peoples bank accounts

b-but muh shares!

Yes, this is how it works!

Who is at fault? The Jewish banking system! In the early days, if you were rich, you needed to invest your money in real firms, producing goods, invest in startups, get some scientist to make your product better and so on. Nowadays the rich can get richer by the stock exchange, just by sitting at the beach and letting the brokers do the work. With all these new financial products it's just easier to let the money make money instead of a worker.

As expected of your typical third world country mindset stuck in a malthusian loop. Of course there are limited resources but your view of the world doesn’t explain economic growth. A lot pf what wealthy people do is innovate to make more with less. You’re painting a zero sum economic viewpoint which isn’t true at all. Obviously rich people are better at doing stuff including allocating resources but even the poor benefit from that. Sure poor people are still pretty low on the totempole but they can benefit from the technological innovations of the modern world thanks to the success of their betters. That’s how developed countries work instead of electing commies into power my african bretheren.

Saved, thanks based-for-once Leaf.

That was also an enormous factor that amplified the Reagan tax cuts. Reagan started it and Bill added to it with NAFTA and all that crap.

>oxygen theory of value

>saving sourceless graphs

Trickle down is a good retard test. Only crony corporatist retards or dishonest shill (like Ben Shapiro) unironically are in favor of it. It's a Neocon talking point.
>Do you expect to grow your production capabilities by throwing money at those who do not produce?
Because the buying power of the middle class if the engine that drives demand which drives the economy you fucking idiot.

retard doesnt even know about utilitarinism

Where do you think the capitol comes from for a business to build that new location that hires the poor person and pays their wage? You're saying the money should just go to the poor person instead because reasons.

>He believes in the labour theory of value
If I have two mugs. One I made myself and one that a 3D printer made. They are identical. Is the one I made myself more valuable? Nope. They're worth the same.

The businesses profits.

How is it a neocon talking point when the concept is far older than neocons dipshit?

In Western nations(not 3rd world corrupt shitholes like Argentina) all a poor person needs to do to become right is specialize in a field that is in high demand. From there they can get a job with a 6 figure salary, and if they live within their means, invest in small businesses or property and grow that wealth for 20-30 years. It’s pretty easy, but you have to be smart and disciplined which poorfags aren’t.

And which university did you go to for your BBAs or MBAs in economics?

Fucking retards. It amazes me how you can blast Trump when all Obama did was make the rich richer and the poor poorer while frolicking around in $20,000 dresses.

And Trump's tax plan calls for middle-class tax cuts. But you keep leaving that part out.

It's really telling that they can't answer this simple question.

Because they work to, just because you think all the money should go to the rich does not mean people who disagree with you think all the money should go to the poor.

...

Would the poor people give up their money if it was better to have money than the product or service?

It's an exchange of value. If I'm hungry and have $5, I can't eat the $5. If you have excess poutine, I can buy the poutine and be better off. You're better off with the $5 than with excess poutine. Everyone wins.

It's not like I give you the money and go, "Oh no! My precious money, why did I spend it instead of hoarding it?" Even the rich don't just sit on money. They invest it, and it goes on to help make more wealth.

Exactly. Poor fats aren’t poor because they have no money. They are poor because they make stupid choices. Getting pregnant at 16 when not married is probably the worst.

Then there would never be any new businesses because there wouldn't be startup capitol ever available. What do you think a venture is?

The fact that you're mad that you can't into business is just the same dynamic as a incel being mad at Chad because they can't into pussy.

Fuck you nigger.

middle class is the biggest meme term ever, literally means anything that isnt 1% top population

Nobody is really participating in my thread (it's if you want to discuss in greater depth), so allow me to copy/paste the contents from it.

>Unless you are reading this in North Korea, or perhaps Cuba, capitalism is your problem. Your suffering today — right now, this minute — almost certainly has something to do with the market allocation of goods and the selling of your labor power. (This is true even if your suffering is of the unavoidable human variety that can be at most eased by a superior system of economic distribution: the difficulties that come from the hard work of being young, being old, or being middle-aged.) The profit motive as an organizing principle for human societies has not disappeared, though in some places it has been tempered. The basic promise of liberal democracy — that it should be possible, through collective action, for people to exert control over their own lives — strains against the power of money and markets to influence political outcomes. It’s 2017, and capitalism is still your problem. And if by some miracle it isn’t your problem, then congratulations: you’ve managed to offload your problems onto some poor souls located somewhere else in the system.

> Labor theory of value
Literally disproven in Marx's lifetime.

>A hundred years ago, if you were in just the right place and were just the right person, you might have been able to imagine that it would be otherwise. The Winter Palace had fallen. Vladimir Lenin and a cadre of fellow revolutionaries had taken responsibility for shepherding in a new order. Capitalism had, at last, a true world-historical rival; its internal contradictions were leading inevitably to socialism. Its days were numbered.
>We know, or think we know, where all this — the idea the world once called communism — leads. It leads to famines, to work camps, to cults of personality, to drab public art, to crumbling apartment blocks, to the loss of political rights, to forced confessions, and to shooting a few million of your closest comrades in the back of the neck in the pursuit of a just cause. The reason that capitalism is your problem today is that communism failed, catastrophically, to provide a better alternative. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, it seemed to leave liberal capitalist democracy as the only viable system remaining, This is what Francis Fukuyama meant when he declared, with apologies to Hegel, that the global spread of liberal democracy represented “the end of history.”

Your house is full of things you wouldn't have been able to afford 70 years ago how has wealth not trickled down?

The 1% make money off the consumer middle class, not the poor. Thus it is in the best interests of the 1% to create a healthy environment for the middle class to thrive.

the most retarded thing ive ever heard. blatantly arguing that consumption is better for the economy than investment is fucking retarded

>Yet that argument now seems as unfortunate and dated a product of the 1990s as Stone Temple Pilots and Jar Jar Binks. Certainly its optimism no longer seems warranted, after the scandalous global response to the financial crisis that began in 2007 has led, in the United States and elsewhere, to the rise of an unholy union of xenophobic and plutocratic politics. In the wake of these developments, even Fukuyama has admitted that he can now more clearly see how liberal democracy can fail. But where does that leave us, 100 years after the October Revolution? If capitalism and democracy are not going to save us, can there be anything from the legacy of communism that is worth salvaging?

The annoying part is that it takes so much more effort to earn that $5 when you don't already have a multi-million dollar business making you money every second of every day regardless of it you come in to work... But if everyone had multi-million dollar companies earning them ridiculous amounts of money, who would be working the bottom level jobs with exploitative wages?

Is the government really better at spending their money than they are? The money just transfers from corrupt businessmen to corrupt politicians to fund more bureaucracy.

The money goes to who owned the initial investment. Rich people just happen to usually be quite good at accumulating them. Poor people are usually too stupid to know how to and why saving and investing is such a good idea long term because they can't see past the day to day.

>no one is responding to my shitty shitpost, better spam it everywhere
Take the hint and fuck off, retard.

Hey man i literally run an import export business, but i just realize some 800 dollar tax break isn't going to get me to hire new staff, nor allow me to lower the prices of my goods or fundamentally produce more for my society other than financial kikery, or whatever other retarded justification 'supply side economics' has these days.

Where do you think the middle class gets their money? The conservative argument is that we must invest in the productive capabilitiesnof our country because those industries are the ones that sustain a wealthy middle class. Ideally these investments would go to support middle class jobs in the US. Notice that this is not always the case and you end up having an american company using its tax break to build a factory in Mexico. The problem is that if you just give your money to middle class families even in principle they will jsut spend them in consumer goods that are mostly imported essentially providing an economic boost to an adversarial foreign power. You do have a point that companies that betray their nation should be crucified in the public sphere especially when taking taxpayer money.

kill yourself shill rat

Cunt, are you trying to summon obongoleaf?

Good point, but the one hand-making mugs could save up money and eventually buy his own 3D printer, then sell those mugs. An advantage of free market capitalism that wouldn't exist in systems that scrape off his extra income in taxes to pay for social programs. Either it would take him longer to afford his own 3D printer, or he would never be able to reach that higher tier of productivity, thus being trapped as a welfare slave for the rest of his life.