Trickle down Economics dont work

[deerlion]

Trickle down economics is something Rich people say so sheep support stupid policies that make the rich richer.

[1714970582]

1714970582

[1714970582]

1714970582

[1714970582]

1714970582

[darkangel11]

Trickle down economics is something Rich people say so sheep support stupid policies that make the rich richer.

The rich always get richer up until someone scams or robs them. If you have a lot of money it's really hard to lose it all because there are many investments that give you around 5% a year of steady, safe income. Most poor people won't notice these options because 5% of nothing is still nothing. I'm joking of course, but 5% a year of your hard earned 10k USD is still not much. You won't be rich by going safe if you're poor, you have to risk it. At the same time a wealthy investor will put in 10 million and be happy with his 5%.

[rohitkaira]

I dont understand how reducing taxes or levies on rich people will make poor people rich, as we can see globally rich people are getting richer and poor people are getting poorer. Theory of lesser taxes means rich people will invest more and therefore poor people will benefit is wrong, rich people only invest when they make good returns whether taxes are high or low, if they cant get good returns they wont invest but again there are many more factors for promoting trickle down economics such as governments and rich people work in conjunction to create policies that help rich people to gain better returns from their investments and in return politician gets political donations. A good example is buying house, suppose i am poor and i have to buy a house i need 20-25% deposit to secure bank loan which is generally not easy but if a rich person want to buy same house he might only need 5% deposit for bank loan. This policy doesn't help poor like me to afford my own house, instead it encourages me to rent house owned by a rich person and pay him rent which generates income for him, in the end i will be paying for his house and may retire homeless if i am not able to buy before i retire.

[Hydrogen]

As I remember it, trickle down economics date back to Bush being President, before Obama took office. Economists falsified fake research concluding the wealthy receiving exclusive tax cuts would constitute a benefit to civilization and society as the wealth "trickled" down the food chain from the wealthy and one percenters to everyone else. Of course its no secret many wealth individuals and enterprises hoard money. They're content to stockpile billions of dollars which are never redistributed towards producing jobs, benefiting the economy or producing tangible goods for society. Its not difficult to analyze the topic in a way which throws into question the effectiveness of the methodology.

This issue has become increasingly muddled and confused over the past decade. There's a lot of misinformation. The worst of it involves the media claiming Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump's tax policies are both offshoots of trickle down economics. It should be mentioned that trickle down economics gives greater tax cuts to the wealthy to shift the burden of taxes further onto the shoulders of the rich to middle class. The policies Reagan and Trump proposed are the opposite. They give greater tax cuts to the poor to middle class in order to shift the tax burden more firmly onto the shoulders of the wealthy.

[player514]

Trickle down economics is something Rich people say so sheep support stupid policies that make the rich richer.

Trickle-down economics assumes investors, savers, and company owners are the real drivers of growth. It promises they’ll use any extra cash from tax cuts to expand businesses. Investors will buy more companies or stocks. Banks will increase lending. Owners will invest in their operations and hire workers. All of this expansion will trickle down to workers. They will spend their wages to drive demand and economic growth. Trickle-down theory is more specific. It says targeted tax cuts work better than general ones. It advocates cuts to corporations, capital gains, and savings taxes. It doesn't promote across-the-board tax cuts. Instead, the tax cuts go to the wealthy.

[wxa7115]

Trickle-down economics assumes investors, savers, and company owners are the real drivers of growth. It promises they’ll use any extra cash from tax cuts to expand businesses. Investors will buy more companies or stocks. Banks will increase lending. Owners will invest in their operations and hire workers. All of this expansion will trickle down to workers. They will spend their wages to drive demand and economic growth. Trickle-down theory is more specific. It says targeted tax cuts work better than general ones. It advocates cuts to corporations, capital gains, and savings taxes. It doesn't promote across-the-board tax cuts. Instead, the tax cuts go to the wealthy.

The problem is that what was true in the past is not necessarily true today, computers today can automate the work of hundreds of persons, so tax cuts could help a business to expand its operations but that does not necessarily means that money will be used to hire more people, this is why the class divide is getting larger, corporations are getting more and more efficient to the point that they can function with a fraction of the employees they needed a decade ago, so it is my opinion that tax cuts should be given to small business that cannot make use of that kind of technology and that instead need to hire people to perform the job, or if it is possible to give those tax cuts to corporations that gives some guarantees that they are going to generate a certain amount of jobs.

[GangNamSK]

Trickle down economics is something Rich people say so sheep support stupid policies that make the rich richer.

The rich always get richer up until someone scams or robs them. If you have a lot of money it's really hard to lose it all because there are many investments that give you around 5% a year of steady, safe income. Most poor people won't notice these options because 5% of nothing is still nothing. I'm joking of course, but 5% a year of your hard earned 10k USD is still not much. You won't be rich by going safe if you're poor, you have to risk it. At the same time a wealthy investor will put in 10 million and be happy with his 5%.

All actions and rumors can affect the market. Especially the rumors cause misunderstandings to take over all assets for those who are puzzled. When it comes to market action that is difficult to predict, then surely the rich will get richer, thanks to this acquisition.

[droptableguy2]

It also depends on the mechanism of the functioning of each country. Maybe they still do not really understand how to do it and are limited in terms of management. It leads to areas of economic decline and lack of many factors for development. There should be a policy of social responsibility, to reduce the load this situation occurs.

[BCSHonda]

As I remember it, trickle down economics date back to Bush being President, before Obama took office. Economists falsified fake research concluding the wealthy receiving exclusive tax cuts would constitute a benefit to civilization and society as the wealth "trickled" down the food chain from the wealthy and one percenters to everyone else. Of course its no secret many wealth individuals and enterprises hoard money. They're content to stockpile billions of dollars which are never redistributed towards producing jobs, benefiting the economy or producing tangible goods for society. Its not difficult to analyze the topic in a way which throws into question the effectiveness of the methodology.

This issue has become increasingly muddled and confused over the past decade. There's a lot of misinformation. The worst of it involves the media claiming Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump's tax policies are both offshoots of trickle down economics. It should be mentioned that trickle down economics gives greater tax cuts to the wealthy to shift the burden of taxes further onto the shoulders of the rich to middle class. The policies Reagan and Trump proposed are the opposite. They give greater tax cuts to the poor to middle class in order to shift the tax burden more firmly onto the shoulders of the wealthy.

Your evidence is very rich and diverse. You have clearly stated the general characteristics and quite detailed. For this weaker economy, it is true of what is actually happening. Do we have something to solve this situation?