Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 180 (8021 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-23-2014 7:05 AM
159 online now:
Malcolm, PaulK, Pressie (3 members, 156 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: tellmeverbatim
Happy Birthday: AndrewPD
Post Volume:
Total: 723,984 Year: 9,825/28,606 Month: 1,515/2,455 Week: 233/592 Day: 5/59 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Trickle Down Economics - Does It Work?
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(3)
Message 78 of 404 (659323)
04-14-2012 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Percy
04-14-2012 8:24 PM


All the wrong questions so all the wrong answers
I think that all the talk about stuff like Trickle Down or Surge Up simply directs attention away from the real issues and allows avoiding the problems just as all the nonsense about whether or not global warming is natural or man caused allows that issue to be ignored.

The goal of Government is not "wealth Creation", it is "the Common Weal".

The goal of Government is providing services and creating social policy.

What really should be discussed and debated is "What services should be available to citizens?"

"What type of society do we want?"

"Do we want to see a 'hereditary moneyed class' created?"

"Do we want to minimize the gap between the rich and poor?"

After those questions are debated, the tools government uses are laws, regulations and taxes.

If we decide that we do not want to create a 'hereditary moneyed class' then tax estates.

If you want to fund services, tax business and individuals.

Tax where the money is regardless of the philosophy or method that got the money there.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Percy, posted 04-14-2012 8:24 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 83 of 404 (659383)
04-15-2012 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
04-15-2012 5:27 PM


Still wrong questions so still wrong answers.
The question is "whether certain areas should be part of commerce?"

Should health care or basic utilities like education, roads, telecommunications, sewer, water, power, police and fire services be "for profit commerce"?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 04-15-2012 5:27 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Straggler, posted 04-16-2012 3:19 PM jar has acknowledged this reply
 Message 273 by Phat, posted 04-24-2012 10:11 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 275 of 404 (660317)
04-24-2012 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 273 by Phat
04-24-2012 10:11 AM


Re: Still wrong questions so still wrong answers.
Great subject but not related to this thread.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Phat, posted 04-24-2012 10:11 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by Rrhain, posted 04-25-2012 1:16 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 312 of 404 (660403)
04-25-2012 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 304 by Rrhain
04-25-2012 1:16 AM


still it's not on topic.
Sorry but I see no connection between trickle down and deregulation.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by Rrhain, posted 04-25-2012 1:16 AM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 380 by Rrhain, posted 04-27-2012 9:43 PM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 382 of 404 (660647)
04-27-2012 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 380 by Rrhain
04-27-2012 9:43 PM


Sorry but I still see no connection between "Trickle Down" and deregulation.

Thank you for trying though.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by Rrhain, posted 04-27-2012 9:43 PM Rrhain has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 383 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-28-2012 3:20 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 394 of 404 (660674)
04-28-2012 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 383 by Dr Adequate
04-28-2012 3:20 AM


However deregulation can also be marketed as providing increased competition and thus good for the consumer.

The fact is that how something is marketed does not make two things synonymous.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 383 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-28-2012 3:20 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 10:39 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 396 of 404 (660678)
04-28-2012 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 395 by NoNukes
04-28-2012 10:39 AM


Re: Not on point...again...
Actually, no. In the increased competition argument the benefit is given directly to the consumer. It is the consumer that benefits directly from being able to buy from multiple sources.

The whole problem as I stated above is that concentrating on the words diverts attention from the problem itself.

It is not deregulation that is the issue, but rather what specifically is deregulated and how it is done.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 395 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 10:39 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 397 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 11:00 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 398 of 404 (660682)
04-28-2012 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 397 by NoNukes
04-28-2012 11:00 AM


Re: Not on point...again...
When as a consumer I can buy a sim card that works on any manufacturers phone on any network, that is a direct benefit to the consumer, not a reduction of cost to the corporations.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 11:00 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 399 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 11:13 AM jar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 400 of 404 (660685)
04-28-2012 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 399 by NoNukes
04-28-2012 11:13 AM


Re: Not on point...again...
Again, how does increasing corporate competition reduce corporate costs.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 399 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 11:13 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 401 of 404 (660686)
04-28-2012 11:22 AM


Summation.
As I said back in Message 78 (All the wrong questions so all the wrong answers), asking if Trickle Down economics works is starting at the wrong end with the wrong question which means we will always get wrong answers.

I think that all the talk about stuff like Trickle Down or Surge Up simply directs attention away from the real issues and allows avoiding the problems just as all the nonsense about whether or not global warming is natural or man caused allows that issue to be ignored.

The goal of Government is not "wealth Creation", it is "the Common Weal".

The goal of Government is providing services and creating social policy.

What really should be discussed and debated is "What services should be available to citizens?"

"What type of society do we want?"

"Do we want to see a 'hereditary moneyed class' created?"

"Do we want to minimize the gap between the rich and poor?"

After those questions are debated, the tools government uses are laws, regulations and taxes.

If we decide that we do not want to create a 'hereditary moneyed class' then tax estates.

If you want to fund services, tax business and individuals.

Tax where the money is regardless of the philosophy or method that got the money there.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014