Trickle down economics is a lie, the proof !

[Frank Merton]

But in this country prices are too high to afford to work for what 3rd world workers make. This leads to all American companies to move their operations to the third world to exploit cheap labor and puts us in the mess we are in. It's not about greed but survival of American workers.

I have a problem with that attitude, namely that the rewards of labor should go to those most in need and most willing to work (which translates most willing to accept lower wage). You use loaded words like "exploit cheap labor" in a propagandistic way.

[Guest]

Nobody ever really calls for that. That's something you inject upon people who disagree with your radical positions.

Total; deregulation is the type of rhetorical stance taken by many free market advocates on these boards. I have almost never heard anyone nuance that position by saying we need this or that regulation.

If people don't want to be mis-characterized they should tone down their rhetoric and say what they really mean, ie that we need regulation to efficiently run a market.

Br Cornelius

[whitelight]

Total; deregulation is the type of rhetorical stance taken by many free market advocates on these boards. I have almost never heard anyone nuance that position by saying we need this or that regulation.

If people don't want to be mis-characterized they should tone down their rhetoric and say what they really mean, ie that we need regulation to efficiently run a market.

Br Cornelius

I want an answer.

[whitelight]

I knew a stupid MSNBCish piece of crap, posted by a monkey, could fly.

[whitelight]

Where is the answer to my question? You started this, you owe me.

[Space Commander Travis]

Oh god, you're not trolling again are you. This thread's seven pages now, and there's been some quite interesting discussions. Why don't you consider what a few others have said rather than going on with your silly "monkey" tantrums. Are you still on about Obama?

Edited May 1, 2014 by Admiral Rhubarb

[Guest]

Where is the answer to my question? You started this, you owe me.

To what ?

You seem to be illogical and a little incoherent - have you taken your meds ?

Br Cornelius

Edited May 1, 2014 by Guest

[Space Commander Travis]

Where is the answer to my question? You started this, you owe me.

You're getting pretty close to being reported for trolling.

To what ?

You seem to be illogical and a little incoherent - have you taken your meds ?

Br Cornelius

I think he's still on about Obama.

[Frank Merton]

Let me get back on topic by saying what I already said: trickle down economics is real but a small part of the economic story. The fact is though that a rising tide does lift all the boats, although the analogy breaks down in that it doesn't necessarily lift all boats the same amount.

The simple point of trickle down economics is that without economic growth solving other problems is much harder than with it. The first priority of any government then should be good economic growth and until you have that you should put off other initiatives (except those that will serve to stimulate growth).

[Space Commander Travis]

The trouble is though, the Capitalist principle is for endless, perpetual growth, that's what the whole principle depends on, and surely that just couldn't possibly be sustainable for ever? what it means for a start is prices endlessly rising, and do wages always rise to keep up? Even if they did, where does it all come from? Surely it would just mean that the whole currency is devalued, we all know what excessive inflation can lead to.

[Guest]

Let me get back on topic by saying what I already said: trickle down economics is real but a small part of the economic story. The fact is though that a rising tide does lift all the boats, although the analogy breaks down in that it doesn't necessarily lift all boats the same amount.

The simple point of trickle down economics is that without economic growth solving other problems is much harder than with it. The first priority of any government then should be good economic growth and until you have that you should put off other initiatives (except those that will serve to stimulate growth).

Those are some mighty big assumptions which only make sense in a infinite world where growth has no boundaries. We are going to have to work out a way of doing all the good things without growth since finite resource base is the primary challenge we face looking into the future. We have simply run out of space to keep looking for new frontiers and new dumping grounds for our waste.

However growth cannot go away when you have interest associated with the issuing of money and that is a little problem yet to be faced. The fact that most central banks are in the near zero interest game shows that the resource limits are starting to impact the "real" economy.

Br Cornelius

[Frank Merton]

I think economic growth is sustainable indefinitely. To be sure resources are limited, but it's a big universe, and there is a lot we don't know. As has been remarked before, I have a lot of confidence in technology, and price is a good way to generate new technologies, as we have seen over and over and over.

Some inflation is unavoidable, so keep it low and consistent so people can make their arrangements. It is an issue of fiscal and tax management, something democracies seem to do poorly most of the time, because of politics.

[Guest]

The trouble is though, the Capitalist principle is for endless, perpetual growth, that's what the whole principle depends on, and surely that just couldn't possibly be sustainable for ever? what it means for a start is prices endlessly rising, and do wages always rise to keep up? Even if they did, where does it all come from? Surely it would just mean that the whole currency is devalued, we all know what excessive inflation can lead to.

Inflation is the de facto reality of the current economy. Take it away and the whole **** house collapses. Otherwise there would be nothing to pay the central bankers.

It is not without precedent that every single Fiat currency based on the money at interest scam has imploded rather than created a stable economy.

The current economic policy of attempting to prop up a dying currency is having the effect of destroying the real economy by encouraging speculative wealth accumulation without actually increasing productive capacity. When you can borrow money from a central bank at less than 1% interest there is always a place to get a short term return on the money (speculative short term trading/gambling) rather than putting it into long term investments in industry.

Its cashing in your chips time at the great casino called Wall street.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 1, 2014 by Guest

[Frank Merton]

In actual fact I think the world is infinite in a number of ways, including in the end the energy we could tap out of space-time, but that is philosophy, not science or economics and not necessary for my argument to still hold.

Economies adjust when there is a shortage of some needed input, by finding new supplies or by substitution or by finding ways to do without. Therefore that society is dependent on something today that is limited is just not a sufficient case for doom-saying. Governments can play a major facilitating role here or, at a minimum, not allow short-sighted people to cause it to get in the way.

[Guest]

In actual fact I think the world is infinite in a number of ways, including in the end the energy we could tap out of space-time, but that is philosophy, not science or economics and not necessary for my argument to still hold.

Economies adjust when there is a shortage of some needed input, by finding new supplies or by substitution or by finding ways to do without. Therefore that society is dependent on something today that is limited is just not a sufficient case for doom-saying. Governments can play a major facilitating role here or, at a minimum, not allow short-sighted people to cause it to get in the way.

And Civilizations have crashed when they run out of their basic commodities. Technology may offer infinite possibilities (which is an article of faith rather than a reflection of reality) but society is currently failing to adjust to a scare energy/resource future and that is why we are in such a mess at the moment.

Economists attempted to substitute nebulous things for real things as vehicles of growth and as a consequence encouraged multiple bubbles along the way. Here in Ireland and the UK we are still recovering from using property as a vehicle for growth and our economists/leaders said never again - whilst simultaneously reintroducing measures which are guaranteed to re-inflate the housing bubble. This is because its almost impossible to generate real productive growth with the economic variables currently in existence. We have entered the Japanese future of stagflation where the growth model simply fails us.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 1, 2014 by Guest

[spacecowboy342]

I have a problem with that attitude, namely that the rewards of labor should go to those most in need and most willing to work (which translates most willing to accept lower wage). You use loaded words like "exploit cheap labor" in a propagandistic way.

You must understand that American workers went through a lot to get livable wages in the twentieth century. Perhaps 3rd world workers should unionize and get better wages and safety and work conditions instead of expecting Americans to lower their lifestyles to third world conditions to compete. American companies go to the 3rd world to avoid American environmental and safety regs and it is to exploit cheap labor as no American could afford to live on what is paid in 3rd world countries. This is not propaganda but fact

[spartan max2]

You must understand that American workers went through a lot to get livable wages in the twentieth century. Perhaps 3rd world workers should unionize and get better wages and safety and work conditions instead of expecting Americans to lower their lifestyles to third world conditions to compete. American companies go to the 3rd world to avoid American environmental and safety regs and it is to exploit cheap labor as no American could afford to live on what is paid in 3rd world countries. This is not propaganda but fact

Couldn't find which post to quote you on but I think you mentioned tariffs somewhere. We raise the price of foreign goods that way the products made at home are cheaper making business stay here? It sounds good but there are some consequences you may not be looking at,

For one when we raise tariffs on other countries then other countries tend to raise tariffs on us. "retaliation tariffs". If this "trade war" gets too bad then countries can get close to stopping trade with each other all together. Depending on how it turns out it would really start lowering international trade.

The loss from international trade above would actually damage our economy.

Our citizens love to complain about "exploiting" workers in other countries (even though like i mentioned in my other post our "sweat shops" greatly improve other countries standards of living) But if we put a tariff on exported goods in an attempt to convince business to stay here then all these products we are accustomed to being cheap will all of a sudden rise. Will our citizens still complain when our products are not so cheap anymore?

here are some sources that may be able to articulate it better if you choose to read them.

http://www.ehow.com/info_10016385_negative-effects-tariffs.html

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/disadvantages-tarrifs-quotas-20726.html

And before someone asked "well then how do you plan to keep business from going over seas" ,

Idk, But I do not have to know the right answer to be able to see when something is clearly the wrong answer.

[Lilly]

Please refrain from making the discussion personal.

[spud the mackem]

The problem is that Billion/Millionaires are too busy working out how to make the next Billion/million by any means possible ,rather than worrying how the Economy is working on the downward trickle,and they don't give a (swear word) about poorer people, as long as they have people to do as they command.

[spartan max2]

The problem is that Billion/Millionaires are too busy working out how to make the next Billion/million by any means possible ,rather than worrying how the Economy is working on the downward trickle,and they don't give a (swear word) about poorer people, as long as they have people to do as they command.

This type of rhetoric just is not working for me anymore. Hell I don't think they all have super pure motives or anything but it seems like this:

"rich" people the modern day scape goat

Anytime things start to get a little bad humans naturally want to pick some group and devour them. People act like anyone who has a six digit income is some horrible SOB ( unless of course they are a pop star then they get an exception for some reason).

It seems like people are mad because everyone company does not pay their lowest ranked employees 10k an hour. Or if someone is having a hard time this week it must be a plot by the "evil corporations".

Yes companies, unions and interest groups fund politicians and expect something in return. This has been going on for all of time and will continue. When you give the government the power to control everything and all the money to pay or give "stimulus packages" to whoever they want then that is what is going to happen. The companies are forced to pay politicians or else the politicians being paid for by their competitors will make sure you loss all your business. And small business gets screwed in the mix. Its called the "age of pull". If you own a big company and you dont work the system then your competitors will legislate you out of the market. We set up this situation by making our government giant.

If we want to fix it then we have to take away the ability for politicians to give favors. Our bills are so big they can sneak anything to whoever they want and we give our politicians the power to control almost everything and let them tax everything.

Big goverment breeds corruption which = being ruled by corporations

Edited May 1, 2014 by spartan max2

[Phaeton80]

Free markets have some flaws but you cant deny that it revolutionized everyone standards of living throughout history. All you have to do is look at the U.S.S.R, China North Korea Cuba etc. Worldwide the standard of living has risen everywhere from free markets. Sure some protections for workers need to be put in place at times.

We all enjoy our first world lives because of free markets. No one can ignore that . All free markets mean is voluntary trade, letting everyone work to their full potential and reap the rewards is what rose society as a whole.

Essentially, free markets equal letting corporations do any and everything to simply maximize profits with a complete disregard of, well... anything else really. Short term, narrow field of vision, 'selfish' decisions, with all due consequence. The interests of society as a whole are not represented. Blindly maximizing profits (which is inevitably what will happen if you deregulate any given market) is what happened with the mass outsourcing of jobs to second and third world countries, and this is essentially what happened with the financial collapse - throwing the Western world in a recession (well not the ones who made the decisions ofcourse, but a recession for people like you and me.. aka The People). The argument that low pay / slave workers are happy with the Western (multinational) payed sweatshops, I dont find to hold any water. These people are desperate, and I think it wouldnt be fair to celebrate a system where they at least can work, be it like a virtual slave. This is no solution to their problem. They are taken advantage of, and we all know it. To paint that as some sort of Altruistic endeavor/effect, that these people should be and are glad the free market system gives them the opportunity (to work for one dollar fifty a day), makes my hairs stand on end. Then again, a sh*tload of stuff happening around me these days makes my hairs stand on end.

[Guest]

We set up this situation by making our government giant.

We set up this situation by electing the wrong people and buying into the lie that Trickle Down economics would come our way.

We the people made bad decisions - its our fault not the Government we elected.

Take some personal responsibility for the mess we are in and stop blaming the Government. You got a **** Government because your kind elected it - tough, do something about it and stop whinging.

Don't blame the corporations - don't blame the government - blame yourself.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 1, 2014 by Guest

[Almagest]

We're about to get hit by a new wave of neo-liberalism when the Liberal-National coalition start legislating. Already the Prime Minister has announced cuts to a wide range of services. Pensions, welfare and healthcare are all being hit hard. People apparently aren't spending enough time as wage slaves so there's talk of the retirement age being bumped up to 70. The treasurer has already begun using the same rhetoric I've seen from Europe and the US. It is the end of the age of entitlements and the beginning of the age of responsibility. Never mind that we're actually entitled to those entitlements, seeing how we elected governments to put them in place and paid taxes for them. All we hear from the new government is economic doom and gloom and the need for austerity. Never mind that Australia was one of the few countries that didn't go into recession with the rest of the world six years ago, and that we have one of the strongest economies in the world at the moment. The ideological axe has been taken out of it's case and it's time for a hatchet job. Not only will economic regulations be slashed, but environmental regulations will be too. I'm worried that Tony Abbott is going to Thatcherize the country.

And amidst all this talk of fiscal responsibility, the Government decided it would be a good idea to buy 58 more F-35s, when I'm pretty sure the US hasn't delivered any of the ones we've already bought.

Frankly this blind adherence to neo-liberalism is one of the most damaging dogmas in recent memory. Sometimes deregulation is necessary in a given situation. But to be completely dedicated to such ideology is only going to make the gap between rich and poor worse.

[Guest]

Its the rich push back against the socially progressive governments of the 60-70's and its all coordinated by the "shock doctrine" henchmen at the IMF and world bank. As soon as there is a crisis they leap in with their stock formula to liberalize the economy and get us back to "growth". This is a coordinated campaign by people who have been waiting for an opportunity for a long time to bring the Developed world under their unmoderated Neo-Liberal regime. We are in catch up mode with the developing world who were subjected to their "structural adjustment" programs decades ago. The script is exactly the same, the endpoint is as well - super rich and super poor. All hiding behind the lie of trickle down economics.

It seems they didn't even wait for the shock to hit Australia before they played their hand.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 1, 2014 by Guest

[F3SS]

Total; deregulation is the type of rhetorical stance taken by many free market advocates on these boards. I have almost never heard anyone nuance that position by saying we need this or that regulation.

If people don't want to be mis-characterized they should tone down their rhetoric and say what they really mean, ie that we need regulation to efficiently run a market.

Br Cornelius

Mis-characterization is you putting words into people's mouths. Quote someone calling for total deregulation and you'll have a valid point instead of a convenient character attack used to make your pov look superior.