• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Has The Illusion Of Trickle-Down Economics Perpetuated By The GOP Ruined The USA?

jobs are determined by demand. not how much extra cash a business owner has in the bank.

True, the myth of the Almighty Job Creator so freely creating jobs out of thin air ignores the fact that the thing that creates jobs is demand for products or services
 
No one actually paid the 90% tax rate, it was nothing but a symbolic measure and the loopholes were so insane that they paid a rate that was far, far, far lower. Add in the fact that back then, the tax burden was on the poor and middle class as opposed to today where most tax revenue does come from the upper class.
 
No one actually paid the 90% tax rate, it was nothing but a symbolic measure and the loopholes were so insane that they paid a rate that was far, far, far lower. Add in the fact that back then, the tax burden was on the poor and middle class as opposed to today where most tax revenue does come from the upper class.

I hate both of these arguments. First was their loopholes back then, sure but guess what their is loopholes now. In terms of the second one that the middle class paid more, well guess what their was more people in the middle class and they made a greater percentage of the wealth in that economy so logic would state that sure they would be paying more as a percentage.

top-1-share-of-income-us1.png


Simple fact is if you are part of that 1% they should be paying close to 3 times more of the percentage of all taxes then they did in the mid 70s since they receive close to 3 times more of the Income(as a percentage)

This graph shows you

TaxShareTop1Bottom90_0.png


That while the percentage of income has increased by 2.35% the percentage of taxes paid by percentage has only increased 2% between 1980 and 2007(both those numbers should be equal)

Looking at this graph it looks like the people truly screwed are the ones in the 1.0000000001-10% earning range(although I am guessing if I looked at the numbers closer the 0.1-1% probably getting screwed over as well, with the 0.1% making out like bandits)
 
Last edited:
fmldezyk6uqkuxyhhqi6.jpg




https://www.gmo.com/docs/default-source/public-commentary/gmo-quarterly-letter.pdf

The numbers don't lie, trickle-down economics is a failed proposition for anyone that is not already extremely wealthy. Numerous recent studies have shown that ensuring money is going to the middle and lower classes directly grow the economy. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results

These graphs don't really tell you enough information. What were the wages in those countries compared to the US in the 1970s? I honestly don't know, but that's a huge piece of information missing. Anyway, Median income in the US is still higher than most of those countries and because of the higher taxes in those other countries the US has the largest average disposable income and household wealth by far.

the average household net-adjusted disposable income per capita is USD 41 355

the average household net financial wealth per capita is estimated at USD 145 76

whereas the bottom 20% live on an estimated USD 11 194 a year.


For instance the bottom 20% in Sweden is basically the same and the average financial wealth and disposable income is about half of what it is in the US. According to the OECD.
 
You could read the article and see that France's wages have increased 280% in the time on the chart. I think a billionaire hedge fund manager that wrote the article may have better insight than what you're offering.
 
You could read the article and see that France's wages have increased 280% in the time on the chart. I think a billionaire hedge fund manager that wrote the article may have better insight than what you're offering.

Yes, but is that because their wages were really low in the 70's when compared to the United States? I mean even after that growth they still are making less than Americans on average.

For instance if a baseball player hits 5 hrs one year and than becomes a 15 hr hitter the next year, he saw a growth of 200% in home runs. That doesn't mean he's better than a guy who hit 35 hrs last year and 36 hrs this year.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but is that because their wages were really low in the 70's when compared to the United States? I mean even after that growth they still are making less than Americans on average.

For instance if a baseball player hits 5 hrs one year and than becomes a 15 hr hitter the next year, he saw a growth of 200% in home runs. That doesn't mean he's better than a guy who hit 35 hrs last year and 36 hrs this year.

SHHHHHH your argument does not support DJ's leftist narrative.
 
Outsourcing has killed trickle down economics. The manufacturing jobs that put money in the pockets of the middle class are now going to foreigners, as well as some office jobs. Therefore, American citizens don't have the money to trickle down with.

The simple solution is to manipulate taxes. First I believe in taxing corporations, not individuals. What needs to be done is to tax the hell out of any coloration that sends work overseas while giving tax breaks to companies that keep work in the states, maybe using a qouta system.

On two related side notes, Ive always viewed the economic belief of the two parties goes like this. Republicans = Sink or swim, Democrats = Tread Water. Neither is a correct course.

Good take. But in truth, unfair business trade practices, and USA taxes on business bringing money in domestically are also to blame.

Trump says he could even these scales if elected President.
 
We haven't had trickle down economics so it's hard to say if it works.

Money coming in to a company sits on Wall Street. There's nothing trickling up or down out of that place. The problem is the majority of the country's wealth is tied up in Wall Street and those damn bankers are too smart to let it leave. You need to take a hard look at policy makers such as Hillary Clinton, George Bush and the like if you want to change that.
 
Yes, but is that because their wages were really low in the 70's when compared to the United States? I mean even after that growth they still are making less than Americans on average.

For instance if a baseball player hits 5 hrs one year and than becomes a 15 hr hitter the next year, he saw a growth of 200% in home runs. That doesn't mean he's better than a guy who hit 35 hrs last year and 36 hrs this year.

Are you not able to read the graph? The horizontal axis is real median wage so exactly what your asking about is taken into account on the graph.
 
By that logic, the Communists shouldn't have beaten us into space. Not that I'm advocating Communism, but it just shows how stupid that argument is.
 
You really think innovators innovate just to make money?

Or that they would completely stop because instead of making 1M they will only make 750k, or in a similar vane Walmart will just stop and close shop and nobody will be there to pick up the pieces
 
By that logic, the Communists shouldn't have beaten us into space. Not that I'm advocating Communism, but it just shows how stupid that argument is.

Humans are altruistic by nature, evolution has passed down that we look out for the common good which is why, in general, humanity tends to do the right thing (eventually in most cases). Of course there are people who go the other way and screw over anyone just to get theirs, similar to a particular GOP presidential candidate, but for the most part that strategy tend to backfire for the average Joe.
 
Are you not able to read the graph? The horizontal axis is real median wage so exactly what your asking about is taken into account on the graph.


I'm able to read the graph fine, but I'm not sure if you understand it either that or you misunderstood my post (not ascribing fault to you, might be my own if that's the case) All the horizontal graph shows is that rate of change since the 1970's. It places a value of one in 1970 and then shows by what percentage the real median wage increased over the years (this takes inflation into account). It doesn't show the actual median wage. Again, US median wages are higher than France still today even though they've seen a 280% increase since 1970 (that's why the graph for France ends at 2.8. 2.8=280% not their actual wage.

Again US median wage is about $52,000 and in France it is $35,000. Even with our no good, terrible trickle down economics. :whatever:
 
Here's a recent clip of Noam Chomsky on how the present-day GOP gets their votes. I think it pretty much sums up the theme of the thread.

[YT]aBJeBu0lBKQ[/YT]
 
Very good summation of the current situation.

The Republican Party has created a monster it can't control.
 
I'm able to read the graph fine, but I'm not sure if you understand it either that or you misunderstood my post (not ascribing fault to you, might be my own if that's the case) All the horizontal graph shows is that rate of change since the 1970's. It places a value of one in 1970 and then shows by what percentage the real median wage increased over the years (this takes inflation into account). It doesn't show the actual median wage. Again, US median wages are higher than France still today even though they've seen a 280% increase since 1970 (that's why the graph for France ends at 2.8. 2.8=280% not their actual wage.

Again US median wage is about $52,000 and in France it is $35,000. Even with our no good, terrible trickle down economics. :whatever:

You do realize that just proves the point of the entire thread right? If the USA has an average higher income of $20k then why are the French kicking our asses in economic growth?
 
You do realize that just proves the point of the entire thread right? If the USA has an average higher income of $20k then why are the French kicking our asses in economic growth?

I dunno, maybe because they are not kicking our ass at economic growth, and since Hollande has been elected they've seen a decline in economic growth. Just because you say something doesn't make it true. They were seeing 2% growth in 2011 and implemented exactly the opposite policies you are criticizing and now they have anemic growth something around .2% a year. Also, the French unemployment rate is near 11%. We have been seeing 2% a year which is not that great for us but certainly better than France. You know one of the reasons why France's economic growth declined?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/b...-french-entrepreneurs-say-au-revoir.html?_r=0

What has happened is that we had a very high median income and we have been able to keep up with inflation while other countries are still playing catch up to even after 280% growth.
 
Last edited:
That's the problem with most conservative people I know. Blows their minds that anyone could do something without trying to get rich because of it.


Please! You would create something to help out people and NOT want to profit from it?
 
By that logic, the Communists shouldn't have beaten us into space. Not that I'm advocating Communism, but it just shows how stupid that argument is.

Then why is the US still around and the Soviets are a afterthought except for US liberal youth who wear Che tshirts even though Che was a Homophobe, rapist, racist mass murderer.
 
Then why is the US still around and the Soviets are a afterthought except for US liberal youth who wear Che tshirts even though Che was a Homophobe, rapist, racist mass murderer.

LIES! He was a bleeding heart liberal, peace lover who loved us all. :ilv:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"