How "Trickle-Down" Really Works

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by Cigar, Nov 27, 2017.

  1. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you think the most important innovation from supply side economics is trivial? Wow!
     
  2. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If I said that I will pay you $10,000. Bet?
     
  3. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This habit of yours is a good thing. It stops you from saying further extraordinarily silly comments. NRU is the central plank of supply side economics. Ironically, its completely reliant on Keynesian Phillips Curve analysis.
     
  4. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    total 100% BS of course. Tax cuts and incentives to help business grow might well result in decreased unemployment but the central plank is designed to cause innovation or supply since that is how we got from the stone age to here. Now do you understand?
     
  5. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you mean the habit of betting you whenever you tell an outright lie that you cant defend even if doing so would win you $10,000?
     
  6. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    HAHAHAHA! The NRU is based on the premise that you can improve work incentives in order to shift it closer to zero unemployment. Your understanding is zero. I bet you $10,000 that you can't find one economist that shows otherwise!

    There is absolutely no link with innovation. Crikey, social democratic nations have higher self employment rates!
     
  7. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    George Gilder wrote the book on supply side and it is 100% about innovation!!. Sorry to rock your world!
     
  8. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    too bad our subject is supply side not NRU!! Why not pay attention?
     
  9. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oooo, that's a strong argument! "I read a book I did". I can only refer to the actual economics. Supply side was based on a nonsensical approach to work incentives. It was spawned by a fake debate with neo-Keynesians over the Phillips Curve. It delivered naff all, unless you support increased inequalities and stunted self employment rates...
     
  10. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not letting you off the hook. That you don't know supply side economics went hand in hand with the NRU guff only confirms that your understanding of economics isn't going to win with $10,000 dollars.
     
  11. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't say I read a book. I said I read the book that introduced the concept of supply side economics.



    Say himself asserted that “the encouragement of mere consumption is no benefit to commerce; for the difficulty lies in supplying the means, not in stimulating the desire of consumption; and we have seen that production alone furnishes those means. Thus, it is the aim of good government to stimulate production, of bad government to encourage consumption.”[3]

    Say’s Law not only provides a foundation for the “equilibrium in most economic models and a source of the stability of capitalism,” as supply-sider George Gilder has noted, but also explains how economic growth occurs.[4] Gilder observed: “As the driving force of economic growth, Say’s law exalts the creativity of suppliers over the wants and needs of demanders or consumers. As entrepreneurs invent new things and learn how to make them more efficiently, unit costs and prices drop and goods become more attractive. As goods become more affordable to a wider public, more people work to acquire them by creating goods to exchange. These new suppliers both provide and acquire new wealth at ever lower expense.”[5] That is, supply—work, investment, entrepreneurship, and risk-taking—drives economic growth.
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2017
  12. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    just googled it and see nothing!! Strange given that they go hand in hand?? Feel like a fool now?
     
  13. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've referred to economic fact. Crikey, the whole economics profession was focused on the debate over the Phillips Curve during that time. Friedman's vertical Phillips Curve at the NRU was critical for the supply side economists. It then spawned guff over how quickly the economy returned to the NRU (with the New Classicals arguing Friedman's money illusion arguments were nonsensical).

    Where on earth do you get your ideas from? In the good old days we could at least blame an Austrian Economics fake site. You haven't even managed that level!
     
  14. Robert

    Robert Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    10,737
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male


    A song can sound like pure junk if the words get jumbled up and the tune is way out of order.

    Democrats treat Reagan as were his song just that. A hodgepodge of claims by Democrats supposed to prove their fatally flawed conclusions.

    The major event that jumped the economy forward was not cutting taxes. True he cut taxes. True they applied equally to all. All quintiles gained. I used to beat the democrats silly proving this. I had stored in my then AOL account my proofs. They were so well researched they killed Democrats claims. Did i persuade Democrats and did they recant and say they now understood?

    Hell no. You can show a woman to a Democrat purportedly his own mother and if he hates her politics, he will deny his own mother.

    Fact: Prior to Reagan this nation was shot to hell. After him, this nation was solvent again, we were back to work and our lives improved.

    Democrats were totally in charge of the congress where tax law is made. I wish Democrats quit denying their own role during the Reagan era.

    If you did not experience the era and be subject to the changes made, you spew left wing politics but have no clue what you are discussing.

    I was in the housing industry since 1971 and saw all of this on a daily and up close basis. We lost over 50 percent of the Realtor group during Carter. I do not lay all the blame on Carter. So quit laying the ill stuff off on Reagan.

    Trickle down became a slogan used only by the Democrats.
     
  15. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Say himself asserted that “the encouragement of mere consumption is no benefit to commerce; for the difficulty lies in supplying the means, not in stimulating the desire of consumption; and we have seen that production alone furnishes those means. Thus, it is the aim of good government to stimulate production, of bad government to encourage consumption.”[3]

    Say’s Law not only provides a foundation for the “equilibrium in most economic models and a source of the stability of capitalism,” as supply-sider George Gilder has noted, but also explains how economic growth occurs.[4] Gilder observed: “As the driving force of economic growth, Say’s law exalts the creativity of suppliers over the wants and needs of demanders or consumers. As entrepreneurs invent new things and learn how to make them more efficiently, unit costs and prices drop and goods become more attractive. As goods become more affordable to a wider public, more people work to acquire them by creating goods to exchange. These new suppliers both provide and acquire new wealth at ever lower expense.”[5] That is, supply—work, investment, entrepreneurship, and risk-taking—drives economic growth.
     
  16. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can't even reply to my comment, instead simply copying and pasting from FEE grunt. You're going backwards!
     
  17. Robert

    Robert Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    10,737
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Democrats economic logic appears to me to be the problem with the railroad train. They observe the train blocks the street and they are annoyed. Thus they stare at the train and by golly it starts moving. They later report to their friends how they caused the train to start moving by staring at it. It sounds silly. But i swear the logic of Democrats is just like that example.
     
  18. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    that time?? supply side is always about supplying, not about inflation and unemployment.
     
  19. james M

    james M Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,875
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    what exactly did I fail to respond to?
     
  20. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You didn't respond. You aimlessly copy and pasted. Try again. Try and use your own words in your critique.
     
  21. Robert

    Robert Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    10,737
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    For the sake of helping Democrats understand all of the Reagan economics, yet try to make it hilariously simple, I want to try to do it this way. I pray it works.

    Consumers have X dollars. They need every bit of this to survive and try to have a bit for emergencies.
    Suppliers have X dollars. Suppliers are desperate to revive their own economy. That yours gets improved is not their major aim. Matter of fact, you have the money they want.

    Democrats say choke off supply. Somehow using magic, if you give the poor 10 more dollars, it will add to the wealth of the rich.

    Definitely cash flows up. This is why it is wrong to call Reagan economics trickle down. It trickles up and not down.

    Suppose you own a factory that is in trouble. You have laid off 30 percent of your workforce.

    Can Government help you?

    Depends a lot on what Government does.

    Can you be more efficient by buying the latest technology? Can you afford the new machines to make products more efficiently and sell at lower costs?

    I learned this first hand in the era of 1967-1971 by owning a machine shop and being forced into such decisions and expenses of buying new machines. My business at the time only owned new machines. I knew i would fail by buying old machines. Nearly all my customers owned old machines. I was in awe when I saw this myself. I also want to have you factor in tooling costs. And design costs.

    I figured I must be the best of all estimator. Shops depend on customers getting price estimates. Customers favor low prices. If your employee is slow or lazy, the shop suffers. Benefits gain the shop nothing. Benefits benefit the worker and never the shop or business. They are overhead. i won't define overhead but I suggest you take time to quickly look it up and imagine it is you doing the paying of overhead. Shortly ... overhead adds nothing to the product and is just a cost.

    Nixon had no such policies and we entered a dark recession and i figured it was time to own a business that did not depend on buying expensive machines only to later need improved and more expensive machines. I saw it as a rat hole.

    I sold out and got into real estate. The sales of equipment gave me cash to afford going into a business of no profit until a sale is closed. And at that time, profits per sale were minimal.

    So, what could i do to gain more business for the shop? When i ventured out to sell the services, it came at a cost. First i was not available to the shop to help my workers. i was in the field selling. i was overhead.

    When i managed to get business, it was no longer overhead. i was adding to the production.

    What happened to the economy under Reagan that was more of a factor was the ACRS. Accelerated Cost Recovery system. This had a direct bearing on our costs and depreciation. Reagan handed us the keys to new machines. This more than tax cuts handed business keys to improve.

    The consumer is in the chain of events but say you visited a lawyer, he was not very much impacted. Your milk producer was. Can you force cows to produce more milk quicker? They have milking machines and feeding machines. But I know next to nothing about milk cows. But most assume their own knowledge makes them an economics expert. Most of what i know came from personal study obtained to keep my own businesses in the survival mode. Workers need not study such matters unless they simply want to know. i think it is worth them finding out.
     
  22. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    37,196
    Likes Received:
    1,575
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only two words needed: 'military keynesianism'
     
  23. Robert

    Robert Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    10,737
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Here is an idea the rich use all the time.

    When you work 40 hours, you know what you gain. What happens to you if you work 1 more hour per day. You can learn to produce gains that are worth it to others and you gain 5 hours per week in production.

    If you deliver mail, you won't want to deliver it one more hr per day. I do not assume you make those decisions. But what hour can you make use of that will gain income?

    I am not speaking of the scams we all see all over the internet. It must provide value to as many as you can reach out to.

    I learned eons back that we do not buy things.

    Yes, Democrats will argue with me we buy things. I think most republicans understand.

    We buy not things, but benefits.

    Repeat. We buy benefits.

    That home has benefits. I as a very skillful agent probe YOU to learn your personal benefits. It matters not to you if i love the home or despise it. My task is to solve your problem your way. My way is not your problem. I have owned a wide variety of homes. Some lived in and some rented to others. I look at a home like a woman looks at clothing and her makeup. It has to be appealing to be sold. I offer this tip to men. Your wife wears your home but you live there. This means the woman views the home different than men do. I admit some women are not as i mention but in my long experience selling homes, I know what women love.

    Many women make lousy agents. Why this is, i believe i solved. Women will sell other women a home the woman agent loves. She often values her own experience and desires over the rest of the women. She simply wants other women to cater to her desires over the clients desires. Me, i put women first.

    i also hasten to add the outstanding women agents do it the way i sell homes. And they earn tons of money.

    So, you have extra time. Come on, we all have extra time. What is the value of that hour per day vs your future?

    Can you wrap your mind around what it means to you? Does not matter one bit if it makes a difference to me or not. It is your life.

    May i offer you some super wisdom? No, not my wisdom, but proven wisdom. Follow the you tube presentations of Jim Rohn. Jim died but when he lived, he is one of the very best all time speakers and he speaks your language. He distilled wisdom to the point if you learn his lessons, anything you do in life will be improved. And the man taught honesty.

    I stated we buy benefits. i spoke of homes. When you buy clothes, are they not benefits? That new car? Your neighbor came home with his brand new Porsche or BMW. What does your Chevrolet look like now?

    So you want benefits so you head to the dealer that you believe most benefits you.

    That good school you spend cash on for your kids? Aren't those your benefits too?
     
  24. Robert

    Robert Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    10,737
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Frankly, given the extreme threat that the Soviets could offer the world, i saw his military as a means to putting the Soviets out of business.

    But it is clear to me you simply ignored my hands on comments distilled from 79 years of living life with years and years devoted to hard core learning how this all works.

    Most democrats do not see Reagan as any person connected to Keynes. But his spending would produce work and opportunities. And this benefited the entire nation. One more thing the Democrats refuse to take responsibility over. They ran the congress and they decided on spending. Reagan always got a larger budget than he wanted.
     
  25. Robert

    Robert Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    10,737
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
     

Share This Page