PDA

View Full Version : We're Broke? Why? Trickle Down FAILS- That's Why!



Gayle in MD
04-05-2011, 03:59 PM
And, the Shock Doctrine, which was raised to etreme levels, under the Bush Administration...but then, one, fear mongering, does lead to the other, fascism....

Corporate/Govenment collusion, equals fascism, no workers rights, growing poverty, and a dying Middle Class.

The American people are NOT lazy Free loaders. They want jobs, and Republican corporatism, have overseen the biggest and most unaddressed, continuous, unchecked, and unregulated, massive outsourcing of American jobs, in history, during a Republican President, and a Republican majority...they had all of the Hill, and things got worse, and worse and worse, until everything crashed, all of it because of uncheck, unregulated GREED.

I knew it would be that way, and so did Q, Sonoma, Jack, Naz, Hondo, Leonard XXX, Sid, Moblvs, and a slew of other Liberals, who have all left this site, by, well, you all know by whom....

G.

Sev
04-05-2011, 04:05 PM
The country has 10 of thousands of pages of regulations.

Unfortunately you fail to mention that the US in-sources almost as much as it outsources.
You also fail to mention that corporations have stockholders who need to be satisfied. Who are also American citizens.
If the business environment is not friendly and does not allow for the bottom line to be expanded it makes good business sense to relocate.

wolfdancer
04-05-2011, 06:22 PM
I studied economics in school and then later on my own. Bought Adam Smith's book, read up on Friedman and Keynes, etc
Trickle down....that always reminded me of a woman that I knew whose father had gotten rich in the then fledgling movie industry. She remarked how kind he was to his servants, but it always sounded like they were indentured slaves.
He was a great admirer of Hitler, and.....well that should suffice

JohnnyD
04-05-2011, 06:44 PM
Why did handoe lie?

JohnnyD
04-05-2011, 06:46 PM
POS

wolfdancer
04-05-2011, 07:53 PM
Gayle, I'm about half way out the door....it doesn't make much since to even try to have a polite conversation here, and it might even be dangerous if one is a Democrat,(as I have been informed)
I may be mistaken, but didn't RR tout the trickle down theory, originally, and that was soon shot down by noted economists at the time.
My memory is a little hazy, but I did study Keynesian theory, which gained popularity during JFK's tenure. Also read Adam Smith's book on his theory, and checked out a few others.
For a short read on economics,(and politics), Google "the two cows system"

wolfdancer
04-05-2011, 07:57 PM
we have no members here using "handoe" as a web alias. Perhaps you should check with your handlers before posting, as lww is always advising others to do?

Under
04-05-2011, 08:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I studied economics in school and then later on my own. Bought Adam Smith's book, read up on Friedman and Keynes, etc

&lt;snip&gt;

</div></div>

I don't see Frederic Bastiat on your list.

Neither is Ludwig von Mises. Ever read Human Action?

I warn it is a tomb, and if paying attention, closely held views
will evaporate.

Throw Keynes in the fireplace.


By the way, Keynes was not a 100% FDR man.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The year 1933 ended with a printing by several newspapers of a letter to Roosevelt from British economist John Maynard Keynes, and 1934 began with press comments on the letter. Keynes noted that Roosevelt was engaged on a double task, recovery and reform, with speed and quick results essential for the former, and the wisdom more important for the latter, lest taste in reforms be injurious. Keynes could not be sure that the order of urgency between measures of recovery and measures of reform had been duly observed, or that the latter had not sometimes been mistaken for the former. He applauded those new deal actions that were, strictly speaking, recovery efforts – like a Public Works Administration – but he was critical of the NRA as essentially reform and Roosevelt’s gold purchase program. Keynes warned that even wise and necessary reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate recovery.
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Morgenthau Diary
By late December 1936, even the leading Keynesian in the administration, FRB chairman Marriner Eccles, was insistent that there be an end to deficit spending, that new relief money for the balance of the physical year should be kept at or below $500 million, and that all new expenditures, including relief, should be met hereafter by taxes, not by further borrowing from the banks. He told Morganthau that “if a program such as this is not adopted” he wanted to make it clear to the President that he will except none of the responsibility for controlling credit conditions in preventing a runaway inflation.
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The difficulty was the one that Keynes and other critics of the New Deal had warned of from 1933 onward:
Roosevelt had done nothing to prepare for the transition from government to private spending that must ultimately be required. On the contrary, his every speech and every action seemed targeted to make that transition impossible. His attacks on business, his support of labor in its is excessive demands and action, the implications for business of this assault on the Supreme Court, the impediments to the movement of private capital created by New Deal legislation, the penalizing affects of his tax policies on those who sought to expand through the use of their surpluses and against those who sought to invest in industry, in his continual refusal to jettison radical and incompetent advisers for those committed to recovery and competent to advise him, all combined with Roosevelt’s pride and prejudice to discourage and prevent the very transition to private spending and employment that was now so desperately needed.
</div></div>

Add the above to your quotable paragraphs. Still comfortable having Keynes on your resume?

JohnnyD
04-05-2011, 08:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">we have no members here using "handoe" as a web alias. Perhaps you should check with your handlers before posting, as lww is always advising others to do? </div></div>
LIAR.

wolfdancer
04-05-2011, 09:07 PM
I never claimed to be enamored with the theory,and don't understand economics, as I am not an economist. (I thought "M1" was a carbine?) I also remember? reading that Keynes theories fell out of favor, and didn't think I claimed him to be FDR's adviser?
As Mr. Smith was only around in the later 1700's, he was just a mention in the list of economists...I mistakenly thought he had written the book that I had read.
It was just a good read and a quick study for me. A book that I had at the time listing many of the famous economists, and economic systems/theories.
The others that you mentioned, I have not heard of. I didn't think I mentioned FDR. also just looked up FDR's economic advisers and ain't never heer'd a them.
Wharton turned me down, as did Harvard and M.I.T.....and all I was trying to get was a janitor's job.

Gayle in MD
04-05-2011, 10:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I studied economics in school and then later on my own. Bought Adam Smith's book, read up on Friedman and Keynes, etc
Trickle down....that always reminded me of a woman that I knew whose father had gotten rich in the then fledgling movie industry. She remarked how kind he was to his servants, but it always sounded like they were indentured slaves.
He was a great admirer of Hitler, and.....well that should suffice </div></div>

My friend, part of the problem, IMHO, is that you can show righties charts, government charts, that prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Corporate CEO's have been taking a larger and larger share of the corporate profits, over the decades, paying themselved more and more, and employees of the company, have been getting a smaller and smaller wage, with fewer and fewer benefits, and the right, STILL doesn't get it.

GREED. GREED AND CORRUPTION. Conservatives Without Conscience

The right is still blind to the fact that Multi-Nnational Corporations, don't give a flying **** abut anything but how they can get more and more money, to stuff in their pockets, and pay less and less, of their share, to live in this country.

They are STEALING, from America, every way that they can.
Not rocket science, huh? Trickle Down, is a myth, created by the wealthy, in order to steal more from the rest.

THE SHOCK DOCTRINE!
G.

pooltchr
04-05-2011, 10:38 PM
Gayle,
We are broke because Washington has been spending money it doesn't have. We're broke because Washington keeps taking more and more from the private sector to pay for more government.
And we're broke because the bigger and more expensive government gets, the more it drains the economy.

Steve

LWW
04-06-2011, 02:08 AM
Actually, that rant simply ignores reality.