Does it actually work?

Does it actually work?

Other urls found in this thread:

cnet.com/news/apple-google-offer-415-million-to-settle-poaching-lawsuit/
youtube.com/watch?v=C_vHp9K0xkM#t=3m15s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Taxation is theft.

There is no such thing as trickle down, its a leftist meme to trick people into supporting higher taxes.

Wealth and poverty trickle in all directions

That's the way the market works...

That's how I see it but I've met people who actually think trickle down economics works. Maybe it does

If you think about it, it does...but in order for it to trickle down, it must first trickle up

>stop taking money from businessmen
>they end up having more money to upgrade farms, capital equipment, factories, etc etc
>workers become more productive
>workers get bigger paychecks because they produce more

Voila, the wealth has "trickled down".

>Trickle down economics

>Doesn't factor greedy (((banks))) that puppet the government and get to do whatever the fuck they want

No, the only way to get money out of the rich is to tax them. It's not like they buy products or services or anything.

It didn't work the first time, dickhead.

Yes, but it all goes to China where we shipped off our lower class to.
Dumb niggers don't even realize their shitty government provided homes give them a standard of living like the upper middle class in shitty countries.

it only works if the money stays in the country

1990s

even when I was a kid and saw that stupid image of cups stacked on top of each other I asked
>why wouldn't they just buy a bigger glass?

America's tax cuts for the rich actually stay in America. The biggest tax haven in the world in terms of volume is the state f Delaware.

The only problem is that the money doesn't trickle down, it just moved from bubble to bubble.

Except that rich people aren't going to invest in manufacturing when the US economy is recovering at a 2% rate while speculating in financial markets nets you a 6% return. This shit is why free market acolytes will never be rich, they don't understand how the world works.

>workers get bigger paychecks because they produce more
Like how fucking NAIVE are you? If a company knows you already work for X$/h they have no reason to raise that salary, they just keep the extra profits, after all, with automation you are doing less effort/work

Not as explained. Still better than socialism.

compare how the peasants outside of 1st world nations live to how we do and you start to realise that 'wealth' on a planet of 7+ billion is just being better than a Chinese slave labourer

They still have to compete, so they have to give you your raise or you'll leave for a competitor and they'd go from underpaying you to being down a worker.

HAHAHAHAHA

Fucking seriously


cnet.com/news/apple-google-offer-415-million-to-settle-poaching-lawsuit/

It does if you don't constantly legislste against business creators.

Thanks to globalism, no. They just use that saved money and build plants in Bangladesh, China or Mexico.

It works on a global level. If the rich don't give their money to the government they invest in other companies that grow and create jobs.

What I mean by "on a global level" is often times they'll invest in companies overseas and create jobs for them, whereas taxes will mostly go the population of a country.

it's a meme that leftists claim reagan said, but the idea is far older.
taxing to stop "inequality" does jack-all

yeah but globalism is a tool of Communism, so if protectionist/mercantile measures are used you can enjoy the wealth trickling everywhere within your own economy. your poor get the jobs Chinks stole etc

It doesn't and Trump is scamming dumb Americans

i am %900 sure u don't have a job.

do u work for the government and not get paid much? I'm trying to think of how someone sees their working life improving under socialism

Read,

ADAM SMITH, THE WEALTH OF NATIONS.

It will explain what true Capitalism is.Hoarding money is not Capitalism.

Does not work.

Supply side puts money in hands of those who do not need to spend it. They put it where highest rate of return will be to increase wealth--overseas--where low cost of labor--thanks to capitalist authoritarian state rule--ensures it.

Based Henry Ford understood this. Paid workers in early 20th Century the unheard of rate of $5 a day so they could buy his cars.

"Taxation is theft" crowd are numbskulls who have no money and don't get how impossible it is to get it once the top have it. They love seeing rich people get more the way they wack off to Emma Watson on the Internet.

Think they will be rich like those who get big tax cuts and put them in BRIC countries, not USand they think that they will one day fuck an Emma. Both untrue.

They base views on an America that once could hand out vast plots of fertile land in the 1800's and at the dawn of the industrial age in the late 1800's & early 1900's before the upper class was created in US thanks to the first super fortunes.

1980's boom was mostly government domestic spending--$1 trillion over 8 years on massive defense build up--all paid for with borrowed money from (((overseas))). Dumb keks think this was a "revolution" it was a temporary jobs program. Could have had govt buy that many Fords, Chevy's and Chryslers and it wouldn't have worked quite as well--only because defense industry is spread more evenly throughout country by congressional chicanery--everyone gets a piece of the pie--from libtard CT to nazi Alabama.

Spend on domestic US companies that make ships and missiles and it's "conservative." Spend it on building bridges, airports, roads, schools, --anything actually useful for most people in this country: "leftist"!

Who benefits ultimately from defense spending being the jobs program? No, not you worried about your "freedom." The rich--who need a war machine to protect "stability" of authoritarian governments to keep the profits flowing from the places they invested tax cuts.

It can trickle down, and if it does things are great, or it can trickle sideways amongst the 1%

youtube.com/watch?v=C_vHp9K0xkM#t=3m15s
Go to 3:15

Trump will get tax cuts and defense spending. McConnel and Ryan will hand him the bills to sign and nod and smile as Trump tells backfa's America is Great Again. Infrastructure spending will go nowhere along with term limits, the wall and ending the endless war in the middle east.

That said, we won't have to go to jail now for calling a fat tranny "he" and a self-mutilated lesbian "she." So that's something I guess...

MAGA!

Of course it works, its just that all the wealth trickling down is going to china.

Our leaders originally presented trade with china as a kind of missionary work to bring democracy to china.

The sell was something like "instead of fighting the commies why dont we trade with them, see, they arent ready for democracy yet, but once they get to witness the benifits of western civilization and have color TVs in every home and mcdonalds on every corner they will come around to our way of thinking!!!"

Of course that was never the goal at all, it was just our bought and paid for leaders opening up an easily exploited workforce.

China is like an evil corporate wet dream.
A heavily corrupted totalitarian government that is willing to back corporate cash with lethal force in a country filled with workers willing to live off of $2 a day, but with modern enough infrastructure to minimize required investment?

Fuck guys like the rothschilds and bilderbergs have been beating off every night over the prospect ever since those conditions disappeared in the american labor force during the early 1900's.

Nope.

If you restrict their ability to do business abroad, maybe. We're about to become a model for protectionism.

Why would I want to continue being a capitalist after I have amassed enough wealth? Hoarding money is the point of participating in capitalism.

There's no such thing as ''trickle down economics''.
Rich employ the poor. The end.

>globalism is a tool of Communism

Dude the hard left has been denouncing globalism since day one, decades before the right decided it was a bad deal. Michael's Moore's 'Roger and Me' is fucking 30 years old. It was the Clintons and the Blairs of the center left that pushed it.

What's the point of hoarding money if you never spend it Mr. Satan?

Market is driven by demand. People need money to spend to create demand.

Republicans want people to spend money.

Democrats want to spend your money.

Well my goal is to work hard and save until I'm 35 or so then retire in a less expensive country but that's just me

I have only a rudimentary understanding of economics, but if a business is taxed less and has more money to expand their business, they're able to hire more employees or pay the employees they already have more, right?

It only works if thousands of bureaucrats all get a slice of it before giving it to poor people.

Money doesn't magically disappear because you have ''wealth''.
If I have a billion dollars in the bank account the money has not gone anywhere. I am not hoarding it. The money is in circulation. Banks don't keep my billion dollars in some safe and shoot everyone who tries to touch it. All that money is traveling trough bank accounts, people are taking out loans.

If I have a billion dollars in stocks, it's still in circulation.
If I have a billion dollars in property, like a piece of land filled with the most expensive cars. Who the fuck cares? You're not robbing anyone of wealth by owning things.

All this nonsense relies on a false premise, the premise that when someone is rich it magically sucks money out of poor people's pockets. That's just not how money works.

That's not how it works. Businesses only investing in expanding their businesses if aggregate demand goes up. If you give tax cuts for the rich but aggregate demand stays the same then they'll just pocket the money and user it to pump bubbles. This is what's happening in the US right now.

Remember that when you give tax cuts for the rich then your revenue goes down, and if you either increase government debt or cut social spending to make up for it then people become less optimistic about the economy, leading to a decrease in aggregate demand. It has the opposite effect.

this guy gets it

Yes, it works, if you count one cent per 10.000 dollar as "trickle down"

only if you live in a world without inflation

in reality horded wealth lowers the value of everyone else's money, so it actually does 'magically suck money out of poor people's pockets'.

>hoarded wealth
No such thing exists

stfu commie

thats a matter of opinion

the reality of inflation is not

You better hope it works, because it's what you signed up for.

I'm sure all those poor desperate people who voted for Trump in the rust belt will be delighted to hear that their poverty and the income inequality that caused it are all imagination.

>trickle down economics
this is a strawman made up by the left to attack low taxes

Basically the idea is that by lowering taxes across the board you encourage more businesses to stay in your nation and make it easier for them to be successful

you also give people more spending power further helping the economy

the left attacks this (sound) idea by saying
>ITS JUST TO GIVE RICH PEOPLE TAX BREAKS
>ITS SO THEY SPEND MORE AND THE MONEY TRICKLES DOWN

'Trickle down' economics does not exist.
It never has.

Now you're just hallucinating and ranting about some stupid shit like a madman.

>rampant inflation due to horrid spending by neo cons and neo libs
>insane debt
>huge taxes driving business away
>no international protectionism to help US business to compete
>over taxing the middle class
>ITS THE RICH PEOPLE WHO HAVE MONEY CAUSING ALL THE ISSUES
>FUCKING RICH PEOPLE! GOVERNMENT HELP!

>rampant inflation due to horrid spending by neo cons and neo libs

There is no inflation in the US. Prices are going up despite commodity markets being at their lowest because companies are just plain stealing.

The US had dumped over a trillion dollars in the economy through quantitative easing since 2008, inflation should be absolutely out of control but it isn't because that money is just being used to pump bubbles rather than fix aggregate demand.

If Trickle-down works, how the fuck is this possible?

>Businesses only investing in expanding their businesses if aggregate demand goes up.
this is true

which is why you allow a greater aggregate demand for business by coupling low taxes with international protectionism in order to make it easier for them to out compete companies from outside the nation.

Therefore they get a bigger slice of the market and the demand that they can meet goes up, even if the total markets demands do not.

FPBP. Adding to it, By having more taxes, the government can give out more money, securing more votes and making more people lazy. That's the left principle.

Seeing as wages haven't really risen for most people since the 70's, how about raising wages so that middle and lower class people actually have money to spend? Wouldn't that increase the demand for commodities?

>Muh protectionism

I hope you guys realize most companies exporting from China to the US are US companies to begin with.

Now I want you to go to youtube and watch the Apple tax fraud senate hearings and tell me with a straight face if you trust those republicans to convince Apple to move their production chain to the US.

Seriously guys there's this thing called capital-labor substitution. When Apple replaces Foxconn it will be african slaves or robots. Trump swindled you (buy so did Bernie and Clinton), you're never getting those jobs back.

No.

And that's why you should give your money to the government. That way, they can trickle it down onto you instead.

Exactly.

So why is this an issue with low taxation?
Surely the major issue here should be what government is spending its money on then, rather than "rich people having money".

>allow a greater aggregate demand
sorry I fucked up the wording on this, still fairly tired.
You don't increase AD that way, you just increase the amount of the AD the companies in your nation are able to compete for.

>how about raising wages so that middle and lower class people actually have money to spend?
Doing this basically makes it more expensive for a business to operate and hire people.
You need to remember that many small - mid sized businesses are struggling to compete in the current market due to over regulation aiding larger businesses and higher taxes which also aid them.

Imagine you have a business and you make X Gross and Y Net profit.
Your costs are
>wages
>transportation
>rent
>other bills such as water and electricity

If you increase the cost of any of these you reduce the Gross and Net profits, making it harder to either expand your business or upgrade your facilities in order to better compete in the market.

You have to remember that smaller businesses are already hard pressed to compete in current markets so increasing their costs hurts them harder than it would the larger businesses.

It also does not magically give them the money to be able to pay these increased wages.

>watch the Apple tax fraud senate hearings
oh believe me I understand how shitty the current system is and how horrible the people running it are.
However in theory most of what I've stated should work, the issue is getting the government to actually bother to do it rather than have them bought off or just simply not care.

>There is no such thing as trickle down
yes there is its called "first movers"
your iphone only costs an arm and a leg because a rich man became a paraplegic to have a phone 1% as useful.

No. "Trickle down" is a lie to subvert the true goal of the tax plan-- making it attractive for poor people to support it.

The idea is the rich can pay no taxes using loopholes that create jobs. So instead of moving your money to a sanctuary where it isn't taxed at all, the rich receive no taxes, and are still part of a system that gets American money moving.

Whether the spending power of Americans increases is irrelevant. What matters is creating a flow that allows money to be traded by the poor at a higher rate.

hear me out here though

imagine the minimum wage is raised to $15/hr
many of the people that have been hurt most by the recession suddenly have enough money to pay the bills and maybe have a bit left over to spend that they didn't have before
they're going to go out and spend that money
presumably, which will drive demand, and thus businesses will earn more money, and thus, probably be able to afford to pay their employees more

obviously it will hurt small businesses more, but walmart and mcdonalds could absolutely afford 15/hr, they just don't want to because they'd rather have their employees on foodstamps and working multiple jobs

>ifunny
Piss off

I have no idea.
I just came here to derail the thread or something and have some You s with y'all
Pic related. It is You.

An important concept that people always miss when discussing these "Pie in the sky" economic plans...

The poor will always be poor. Many of the poor live that way on purpose. Going so far as to turn down riches.

Liberals want to sell you the idea that everyone wants to be rich - which simply isn't true.

This guy is a retard

>mfw could be a girl

Of course! I asked Santa when he brought my presents last year and he confirmed that trickle down economics definitely work before he hopped away on the Easter Bunny.

>So why is this an issue with low taxation?

Believe me I'm no big fan of taxation just like you guys. However if you're going to give big tax cuts then something's gotta give.

Do you really expect people to remain optimistic about the economy, go out and buy things when they see government slashing social benefits and programs and the world falling around then because there's no money to even fix roads or collect trash anymore? That's not how this shit works.

>egypt here
>no signs of economic realities so far
>will continue looking

>tfw people say this You is a boy
Another photo from another angle, no face shown.
Really activates your almonds

It does it in the UAE.

There is money. It isn't a tax cut so much as it is a loop-hole. Trump talked about this in his 1991 meeting with congress, but you haven't seen this because you're uneducated.

Instead of rich people taking off with their money, it is guaranteed, but STILL EFFECTIVELY STOLEN and moved through a system. That's what a loophole is. You pay taxes, but they're given immediately back to you- on the assumption that the system you just paid into (maybe a loan on a shopping center?) refreshes the system.

The problem is, if you try to be simple and just have regular fair taxes to make your country great: Rich people will literally just move so they don't pay anything at all. You HAVE to guarantee their money, but also move it through the tax system.

In CA when they recently raised minimum wage the cost of food, theaters, and everything else just went up.
Raising minimum wage hurts small business, and hurts people making just above minimum wage by making everything more expensive.

What we need is to have a maximum wage that is based on a companies average wage.

Just put the gap between executives and workers back to where it was in the 50s and we are golden.

fpbp

"Trickle down" is over 100 year old leftist straw man to advocate more government control over the economy.

>ut walmart and mcdonalds could absolutely afford 15/h
so you'd rather aid them in creating monopolies which allows them to basically control the market on their own, and the prices of what they sell with it, than have a reasonable rate of competition which aids in reducing cost and therefore cost of living for the poor?

On top of this you're assuming everyone can get a job at wal-mart or McDonald's, but if people aren't buying from these places (ie all the people who no longer have a job and therefore can't spend money to begin with) then the amount of workers will reduce

you're also forgetting that automation is a thing and that low skill jobs such as McDonald's or Wal-mart can be done largely by machines now.
The only reason they're not is cost.

If you increase cost of labour to a level that it becomes attractive to automate you kill those jobs to begin with.

I agree with you on that one.

However one massive way in which the US could gain a lot of its money back is through their military.

You're clearly not an idiot so I'll skip the details but basically he plans to recoup a lot of the military budget by having countries pay for the protection the US gives them,

If he manages to get enough back from this the he can mitigate the issues that will come from the cuts.

I'm not going to say his plan is ideal but I honestly don't believe the US is in a position to have an ideal situation or plan right now, and I think his plan to deregulate the market should also help with this if he does it before he cuts taxes across the board.

>maximum wage
you're a retard as well.

There are no taxes in the UAE

That's his point.

That's so disingenuous. They horde a shit load of money they could never spend and you know it.

Minimum wage jobs aren't meant for supporting families. Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers, people in school, and people in 2 income households. Fuck them if they need foodstamps cause Jamal decided to have 8 kids.

wow really makes u think

>They horde a shit load of money
see and Stop being a fucking retard before you comment.

Nah, the billionaire celebrity with an establishment cabinet is 4 the people.

HMMM GEE I DON'T KNOW

>money loses value over time
>money sitting in a bank becomes less money
>better keep all this money sitting around huh

Investing money is FUN, why would you NOT want MORE money by investing in people's ideas and expanding your business?

Look at Elon Musk for example, he's a billionaire. Do you not like the idea of colonizing Mars? Would you rather wait for the government to stop giving niggers and deadbeats free shit for this to happen?

People who hoard money die eventually. Businesses live off of providing services. What's the downside?

>People who hoard money die eventually
>inb4 muh inheritance

It is possible to actually study economics.

Macro-economics is the world history of economics.

Unbelievably, this board is more retarded than Sup Forums. .......adios

It does but companies need to be forced to use the savings for development or job creation.

>However one massive way in which the US could gain a lot of its money back is through their military.

Military spending is either tax money or government debt. The problem remains e same. What you're really arguing for here is more fiscal policy. It can be done through military which is the kind of fiscal policy republicans tend to like or giving away free shit which is the kind liberals tend to like. It really depends on where you guys want to be as a nation, really.

>FORCE PEOPLE TO SPEND EVEN IF IT WILL HURT THEM AND THEIR PROFITS
Holy shit.

>globalism is a tool of Communism
You DO realise that hardcore capitalists are the biggest proponents of Globalism? They have MUCH more to gain from globalism than the commies ever do

It does become hoarded wealth from the perspectives of the tax system

if a tax system is in place, it is expecting another layer of 'money' to be added to circulation. If the people are ducking taxes, the system will stagnate.

Obviously this is only a problem if your country really relies on its tax system. But it's a fact nonetheless.

read the rest of the post mate.

>from the perspectives of the tax system
so its not hoarded then.
Its just not being taxed.

They will lose it down either path but now it can generate money for them.

Right. And it's not even a fault of the rich. Just the fucking morons directing the money.