Trump nailed when said.......

[OldWiseGuy]

It's a fact of life if the Trickle Down Theory is true. It's still an economic theory that appears not to work. My question stands. If you believe in trickle down economics, and the "job creators" have been experiencing growth, and the average income has increased, where's that trickle down effect?



Great. So considering that the top earners have been experiencing growth, the GDP has been growing, the average income has been increasing. If, in your example, the corporation has not only stayed in town, but is experiencing growth, why do we need to be bringing manufacturing jobs back? That growth is already trickling down, and has been for several years if the theory is true.



I've talked to you about economics before, and I know not to just take your word for it. My question is: If you believe that the Trickle Down Theory of economics is true why do you and your candidate promise to work against it?

Trickle down simply means that,

Projects are proposed.
Capital is formed by borrowing, issuing stock, taxation, or from profits.
Spending in the form of wages and commissions
begins with the top earners; planners, engineers, suppliers, etc.
Followed by lower level wage earners.

This process is repeated continuously at all levels of the economy.

The term was invented as an economic model, but accurately describes the only sustaining economic model there is in a capitalistic economy. All other models become inbred or cannibalize themselves out of existence.

 

[PeachyKeane]

Trickle down simply means that,

Projects are proposed.
Capital is formed by borrowing, issuing stock, taxation, or from profits.
Spending in the form of wages and commissions
begins with the top earners; planners, engineers, suppliers, etc.
Followed by lower level wage earners.

This process is repeated continuously at all levels of the economy.

The term was invented as an economic model, but accurately describes the only sustaining economic model there is in a capitalistic economy. All other models become inbred or cannibalize themselves out of existence.

I can't be bothered to teach you how competing economic theories work, and it doesn't matter. Let's just say we know for certain the Trickle Down Theory works. Show me that you believe in it.

I will ask my question yet again, try not to sidestep this time: If, using your metaphor, the corporation in town is not only still there, but experiencing growth, then the trickle down theory should work. The theory says that if the corporation is flourishing then the town should flourish as well. If the corporation experiences growth, then the town should experience growth as well.

So why are you and your candidate so set on bringing in manufacturing jobs from abroad?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No it doesn't.

At one time the USA could get away with a bunch of uneducated ignorance, because a good part of the rest of the world was even more uneducated and ignorant. Now the rest of the world is catching up and passing the USA in education. Now the uneducated minimum wage earners are worth what they are being paid in China, about $1.86/hour, and that's being generous, a lot of countries pay even lower wages. If the wages go any higher, those people can be replaced by robots. And as the cost of robotics drops, the wages companies are willing to pay will also drop.

EDIT: Oh, and you will also have to start wearing a face mask, because the pollution from some of these manufacturing plants is so bad, and if you want to make it economically viable for those companies to move to the USA, then you will also have to let these companies pollute your cities.

In your race to the bottom, here is what you want to bring to the USA:

China tops WHO list for deadly outdoor air pollution

More than 1 million people died from dirty air in one year, according to World Health Organisation

That ought to be good eh?

I didn't say uneducated, I said ignorant. Many highly educated people are ignorant of the damage they are doing to themselves and others. This damage is the basis of much of our economy.

Example. Dirty air promotes all sorts of businesses, some that pay pretty good. The threat of war promotes the defense industry. Ignorance of good health and safety promotes the health care industry, etc. You get the picture.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then it should work.

So, I will ask my question yet again, try not to sidestep this time: If, using your metaphor, the corporation in town is not only still there, but experiencing growth, why do you and your candidate want to work against the model, and bring in manufacturing jobs from abroad?

In my example the company is gone, not still there. If it were still there there would be no problem.

 

[J Cord]

I didn't say uneducated, I said ignorant. Many highly educated people are ignorant of the damage they are doing to themselves and others.

You can find outliers in any population, but generally ignorance goes hand in hand with a lack of education.

That's the definition of what it means to be ignorant, and what it means to be educated. Look up those two words in the dictionary and you will see what I mean.

EDIT: Read this OWG, I scanned it quickly, but it looks like it will explain what I mean:

America’s Cult of Ignorance Is No Match for Asia’s Cult of Intelligence

The answer, I think, can be found in a comment science fiction writer Isaac Asimov made about the U.S. while being interviewed in the 1980s: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
...
The troubles lie in the cult of ignorance and anti-intellectualism that has been a long-standing part of American society and which has become increasingly evident and powerful in recent years through the propagandizing and proselytizing of groups like the Tea Party and the religious right.

Old Asimov sure nailed this election cycle eh?

 

[PeachyKeane]

I didn't say uneducated, I said ignorant. Many highly educated people are ignorant of the damage they are doing to themselves and others. This damage is the basis of much of our economy.

Example. Dirty air promotes all sorts of businesses, some that pay pretty good. The threat of war promotes the defense industry. Ignorance of good health and safety promotes the health care industry, etc. You get the picture.

We should destroy the environment and provoke war for the good of the economy?

 

[PeachyKeane]

In my example the company is gone, not still there. If it were still there there would be no problem.

That's wonderful for your example. In reality, however, the company is still there. We have a reasonable unemployment rate, we are experiencing growth, the top earners are earning more than they were 8 years ago. The rich job creators have done very well for themselves. If trickle down theory holds, why are we bringing in jobs from overseas?

 

[Goonie]

We should destroy the environment and provoke war for the good of the economy?

If it's good for the economy in the short term yes! Welcome to unconstrained capitalism

 

[PeachyKeane]

I'm going to try to tie two ideas here together because I was hoping for a reply that never came. As I said, the US has $120 billion in remittances sent off to other countries each year, most from legal immigrants on work visas. This is more than any other country, and part of the reason for that is that we have to import foreign nationals to do jobs that Americans are not qualified to do, particularly in technology. OWG is complaining about money lost to illegal immigrants. We lose more money to legal workers who are doing jobs we can't because we don't have the skills or education to do it. Isn't that what we should be trying to change?

 

[PeachyKeane]

You can find outliers in any population, but generally ignorance goes hand in hand with a lack of education.

That's the definition of what it means to be ignorant, and what it means to be educated. Look up those two words in the dictionary and you will see what I mean.

EDIT: Read this OWG, I scanned it quickly, but it looks like it will explain what I mean:

America’s Cult of Ignorance Is No Match for Asia’s Cult of Intelligence

The answer, I think, can be found in a comment science fiction writer Isaac Asimov made about the U.S. while being interviewed in the 1980s: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

Old Asimov sure nailed this election cycle eh?

As confirmed by Newt Gingrich.

 

[J Cord]

I'm going to try to tie two ideas here together because I was hoping for a reply that never came. As I said, the US has $120 billion in remittances sent off to other countries each year, most from legal immigrants on work visas. This is more than any other country, and part of the reason for that is that we have to import foreign nationals to do jobs that Americans are not qualified to do, particularly in technology. OWG is complaining about money lost to illegal immigrants. We lose more money to legal workers who are doing jobs we can't because we don't have the skills or education to do it. Isn't that what we should be trying to change?

Well said. The "cult of ignorance" has to end, or the USA is destined to become a third world country.

 

[kermit]

Another mistake Clinton made was to denounce 'trickle down' economics, which revealed once again that she doesn't understand capitalism. Most economic activity starts at the top, with capital formation.

Wrong. Economic activity starts with the identification of an opportunity. In most cases this is driven by demand.

A simple example is the creation of a new position by an employer. Do they create it because they want to or because they have the capital to? No. It is created because an opportunity to increase revenue beyond the additional cost is identified. Once the opportunity is identified the employer will seek the capital to make it happen.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You can find outliers in any population, but generally ignorance goes hand in hand with a lack of education.

That's the definition of what it means to be ignorant, and what it means to be educated. Look up those two words in the dictionary and you will see what I mean.

EDIT: Read this OWG, I scanned it quickly, but it looks like it will explain what I mean:

America’s Cult of Ignorance Is No Match for Asia’s Cult of Intelligence

The answer, I think, can be found in a comment science fiction writer Isaac Asimov made about the U.S. while being interviewed in the 1980s: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
...
The troubles lie in the cult of ignorance and anti-intellectualism that has been a long-standing part of American society and which has become increasingly evident and powerful in recent years through the propagandizing and proselytizing of groups like the Tea Party and the religious right.

Old Asimov sure nailed this election cycle eh?

Interesting, but that's not what I meant. By ignorant I mean that even the highly educated make foolish decisions that have terrible long term consequences.


The assertions in this article need a closer look.

 

[PeachyKeane]

By ignorant I mean that even the highly educated make foolish decisions that have terrible long term consequences.

That's not a particularly good definition of the word ignorant. People need not be ignorant to make foolish decisions.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That's wonderful for your example. In reality, however, the company is still there. We have a reasonable unemployment rate, we are experiencing growth, the top earners are earning more than they were 8 years ago. The rich job creators have done very well for themselves. If trickle down theory holds, why are we bringing in jobs from overseas?

By the time the money reaches the lower income workers there's not much left, but still it's a 'trickle' (it took me many years to get off of page one of the tax tables).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That's not a particularly good definition of the word ignorant. People need not be ignorant to make foolish decisions.

Most of the important decisions that are made for us are made by intelligent, educated people. How's that working for us?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Wrong. Economic activity starts with the identification of an opportunity. In most cases this is driven by demand.

Ideas are just ideas. Economic activity only starts when money begins to flow.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm going to try to tie two ideas here together because I was hoping for a reply that never came. As I said, the US has $120 billion in remittances sent off to other countries each year, most from legal immigrants on work visas. This is more than any other country, and part of the reason for that is that we have to import foreign nationals to do jobs that Americans are not qualified to do, particularly in technology. OWG is complaining about money lost to illegal immigrants. We lose more money to legal workers who are doing jobs we can't because we don't have the skills or education to do it. Isn't that what we should be trying to change?

Perhaps we should rethink our educational system.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

We should destroy the environment and provoke war for the good of the economy?

The 'economy' doesn't qualify commerce according to good or bad. It's morally neutral. Money earned in the drug trade is just as 'green' as from any other economic activity.

 

[PeachyKeane]

Perhaps we should rethink our educational system.

Yes. Perhaps we should. Clinton at least has a platform to make college education more accessible, particularly for 2 year training programs. What's Trump's platform? What's his plan?

He doesn't have one, because we know his supporters have no interest in education.