Summations Only

I'd say too often people ignore the trickle up economics. Everything in life must have a balance. My grandfather used to say, and I still believe this, is too much of anything always result in something bad.I often makes a double facepalm when I hear either side of the argument. On the one hand, conservatives only think about the trick down effect. Empower wealthy people so they can create more jobs. Put money in their pocket and they'll have more table scraps for the rest of us to pick off of.Then on the other hand, like my socialist friend Rine, the argument goes something like completely regulate trade and business so they can't take advantage of the less fortunate. Tax the hell out of them to expand the public sector. He doesn't know it, but he's actually talking about the trickle up economics. Put money in the pocket of the wealthy and he either chooses to spend it on investments or he might just put it in a bank. But put money in the pocket of a poor man and we know with absolute certainty that he will spend it right away, if for nothing else, on daily life necessessities. (too many 's'?)The fact of the matter is the best approach is somewhere in between. I'm sure everyone has seen my other thread where I got acused of being all kinds of things. My point in the other thread is we need to step beyond our ideologies and look at what the best approaches are and not what our ideology tells us.We need to let businesses do their thing because most innovations in the last century, the last milennium, the last forever came from the private sector. At the same time, we saw great strives in progress in the public sector as well. And I'm not just talking about this country.We need to have a balance of trickle down AND trickle up economics. Let businesses do their thing. Let the wealthy make their investments. At the same time, tax them to maintain public works (like the transportation department).This is why all the republican candidates scare the hell out of me. Some democratic candidates scare the hell out of me also.Anyway, to tackle the main topic of the thread directly. Society did try to go all out on trickle down economics in the past. What resulted was some of the worst working and living conditions in human history.

Allow me to add that historically it's always a pattern that a ruling entity always end up in more debt than it could handle. All governments run into financial trouble eventually. I believe the reason is it always cost more to maintain a civilization's infrastructure than the GDP of that civilization.

The industrial revolution in England, for example, saw some of this. What ended up happening was the nation's wealth ending up in the hands of a few. Children worked night and day in coal mines and factories. Workers had no right.Some would argue that going all out on trickle down economics brought on the great depression.