Money trickles up, not down

Is the GOP for or against big business??

one thing Ronald Reagan proved , despite his trickle down economics theory

money does not trickle down

MONEY TRICKLES UP

I do not agree that checks should be sent out to people without some form of effort by the recipients..there should be a system in place that requires people that need the money to ask for assistance..people that don’t need the money should not receive the money

I know retired people that are worth millions that received a stimulus check under trump

but I digress

once the stimulus checks are sent out and cashed the below business will eventually end up with the stimulus money


Oil
Wal mart
Target
Amazon
Phone companies
Cell phone companies
Fast food
Casinos
To name a few

again

money does not trickle down, it trickles up

why don’t the democrats use this information to help pass the bill

 

Give them a finger, they will take a hand.

 

Perhaps because it is not true.

 

Those that got get.

 

I'm 79, still running a business, still paying high social security taxes that will never benefit me but are partly taxed as income, and other substantial income taxes- and I take nothing from government, never in all my life. Not so much as an unemployment check. They haven't sent me a stimulus check. They are using the money they tax from me to pay for your stimulus.... I'd agree that's not "trickling" down either. It's more like a waterfall.

 

I think that if you are in the category with income high enough to not qualify for a stimulus check, you have nothing to complain about. The country gave you the opportunity to make a lot of money. Now pay your taxes, like any American loving their country would do, some probably paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes, when they earn less than you. Or is that too much to ask from a "patriot"?

 

The money the government sends out originates with the selling of bonds, so unless you have some evidence that the people who shop at Walmart and eat off the Dollar Menu are secretly hoarding trillions in treasuries, I am guessing you are not thinking your position all the way through.

In addition, the more money we put in circulation, the slower money moves. See https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2V
The slower money moves, the less of it that reaches the sticky-fingered McNuggett eaters which is why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

 

So regardless that many above the magic watermark are still out there working and making sure other people are getting paid to service those that can't or won't, and pay their taxes, won't receive the stimulus money that their taxes are contributing to, pay a higher percentage of their income AND higher dollar for dollar than those who are receiving the stimulus, but you equate your statement to patriotism?

No wonder this country is ****ed up.

 

I don't object to paying taxes, I object to two things....
Not getting my money's worth-
And money being wasted that benefits nobody, or benefits very specific people unjustly.

My income varies substantially depending for example if I sell stocks or not. Some years I sell nothing, others everything. When you sell, you take a profit or loss and it's taxable. Until then, it's unrealized gains that are just paper numbers, but eventually will become taxed income.
I technically should have been in the receiving group for the first stimulus, but it never showed. Could be they looked at more than the most recent tax year, I don't know. But I've never asked for it or worried about it. In the bigger picture, I don't need it, and it would see it more like welfare than a tax refund, and I wouldn't take that kind of money anyway. Point is- that the stimulus is indeed a transfer of wealth in some ways. Don't get me wrong, there are times in an individual life or a national economy where we must do things outside the norm to preserve stability and help each other out. I only object to that when it's used for political manipulation rather than the good of the nation. Unfortunately, our politicians don't agree with that. That's the case with the pending stimulus bill, which is packed with pork favors for special interests that would never pass on their own. I consider that a kind of fraud on the people, perpetrated by unscrupulous politicians.

 

$1,200 and $600 payments are what you consider a "waterfall"? FYI...the cost of living has increased considerably since the 1940s.

 

I think you got your money's worth many times over. Your taxes allow a civilized country with strong property rights, which are strongly enforced, and a country which protects you from external enemies, preventing warfare on US soil. The conditions in the US are such that you can easily keep most of your money, unlike in countries with weak governments, where strongmen would take all your money, and the weak government couldn't or wouldn't protect you.

Second, what seems like special interests to you may be a lifeline for someone else. Trump bailed out farmers. I could have complained about that as pork to special interests. However, I didn't because farmers needed help after floods and the Trump tariffs.

 

It's a matter of integrity. If someone else has four diseases and you only have two- you may be better off, but you aren't well and healthy. So long as we tolerate waste, good projects and genuine needs will suffer. The question is how much pork and waste we should tolerate- and today, we have a new administration that I see wallowing in poor decisions and waste. You may see it differently- but anytime the goals depend on forcing others to pay your way and support your folly, something is seriously wrong.

I'm not against them considering special projects- but I am against burying them in must-pass bills so that the public interest is denied a say in them.
The pending stimulus bill is certainly nearly impossible to comprehend, but most experts reviewing it say there are hundreds of billions of dollars in pork stuffed in the thousands of pages of the bill.
This is not what honorable people do- it is what con artists and fraudsters do.

 

Perhaps the list of companies and their political donations should be investigated.

 

The poor stay poor because they don't invest, dont know how to handle money, and when they do get their hands on some money they spend it foolishly...

 

Those may not be the only reasons, but they damn sure lead the pack!

 

Anybody who claims that trickle down doesn't work is economically illiterate.

 

Your problem is that you believe that the trickle down theory was supposed to mean wealth redistribution.

That's your error. And you're wrong.

That isn't an issue with the theory.

 

Spoken like a true leftie. "Give us your money and shut up".

The country gave EVERYBODY the same opportunity to make a lot of money. We are starting to agree. Some succeeded, some failed.

Wrong this time. Nearly half of the country does not pay taxes.

Non-sense.

 

I get the feeling this is another anti-capitalism thread.
Before you guys start fighting over nothing, you do realize that we do have "socialism" as well, in the form of social programs. Wellfare, disability, social security and so on.
Do you think these systems will work without capitalism?
Just think if EVERYTHING was socialism, how long before the well runs dry.
Capitalism is far from perfect. Trickle down is also true and false at the same time.
@spiritgide gave a great example of how its TRUE.
and how is it FALSE? Easy! you think when these companies get stimulus and tax breaks that they are using the extra money to increase employee salaries or just to give the guys at the TOP bigger bonuses that they don't actually need as much as the guys under them because they actually make MUCH MORE MONEY
Bottom line, all these systems are majorly flawed so I think its best too look at it in terms of WHICH ONE SUCKS THE LEAST
Now that we have all these super smart lefties in office, maybe they will figure out the solution. Keep the faith!

 

Name anybody in the country that doesn't benefit from those things?

LOL. "You should be so lucky that in this country, the government protects their right to take your wealth, as in other countries they would take it by force." You're nothing more than a thief who has convinced yourself that you are a saint.

 

Ah, the old "taxes are theft" accusation. What's new?

In any case, would you agree that strong and enforced property rights benefit the haves more than the have nots? Would you also agree that weak governments cannot enforce strong property rights?

 

No the problem is that it is just that. A trickle. A pittance, compared to what's at the top, even though you need those folks being trickled on in order to have the glut at the top in the first place. In fact, it is because all the folks at the bottom receive is a trickle that the glut can remain at the top.

Sure, that's great for those at the top. Not so much for those who aren't, even though they are just as necessary for the whole thing to work as those at the top, if not more so.

 

Why don’t they use this “information”? Because, it isn’t “information” at all - it’s hogwash. You seem unaware that the money those companies accumulate by them providing the various goods and services people want, need or desire. Which brings up the question - where do those people GET the money they willingly exchange for fhose goods and services? The obvious answer is that they work for businesses and companies that compete to provide those goods and services. And what do those companies do what that money? One of the most important things is to pay their employees and provide a slate of benefits - intended to keep people working for them rather than moving to a competitor offering higher wages and/or more desirable benefits. Simple really.

 

And, of course, some of those at the bottom are just starting and will move up as they develop marketable skills, knowledge and expertise. And some will just drink their Budweiser, watch The Bachelor, go to bed and fall into the “lather, rinse, repeat” cycle.

Let’s be realistic; contrary to the myth many seem to believe private enterprise are NGO welfare agencies; they exist to create products and services and sell them to a customer. They hire employees to help with that. Let’s be blunt: the wage a person gets, including taxes and benefits, has to be more than what the person adds to the company’s bottom line. Related to that is what would be the cost of replacing the worker - including how rare his qualifications and skills are. So, a scientist, engineer, or medical person is far more valuable than a floor mopper.

 

QN- Consider that the key issue is not so much what government does and what individual people do for themselves. "Have nots" become "haves" all the time- because they worked for it. I don't mean they just held a job, I mean they managed their money and their priorities, and gave the future importance. I know of no laws that prevent anyone from buying any property, nor any laws that say you can't make money.
I've been tutoring a grandson for about two years now, who got tired of not being able to get things together and finally asked if I would show him how to do things. I told him I'd be happy too, but only if he could make some fundamental changes. He agreed. So before I went about teaching him to build wealth and security, I had to find a way to change his attitude and perception, and that took a while- but we got there. He was under water financially when we began. Now- he owns a nice home, and his equity is up to about 100k; more than his loan balance. Have him investing now too; took him to Omaha with me to hear Warren Buffet at a shareholders convention, meet a lot of people who were just like him but have become wealthy by working smart. In his first year of investing- he has doubled what he put in. Taught him to put the future and preparing for tomorrow ahead of "I want it now", and so he also has saved a cash buffer- which means when feces happens, as it always will... he's not wiped out; just inconvenienced. I'm not giving him money- I'm showing him what to do, how to make choices, and explaining why- with the condition that he has to listen. One of the rules was that if he wanted my help, all decisions of any size would be discussed with me first. I've taught him how to think differently, and today for his age, he's way ahead of where I was at the same time. He has no college, is probably slightly above average in intelligence. The difference in where he was a few years ago and where he is today is all due to working smarter.

Attitude has a great deal to do with this ability. Nobody can teach you until you are truly hungry to learn and ready to change fundamental beliefs, and government could never achieve these things at all.
Whenever we hold government responsible for where we are- we surrender our own power over our own lives.