Trickle down theory, did it work?

tulc · Oct 28, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
Sorry comparing two different things. Free market/versus forced labors. Every worker in America whether that is in the steel/auto/mining industry is better off. Our auto industry has been run into the ground by the Unions. (emph. added)

...and not because they decided to go with the biggest gas sucking machines they could produce instead of more efficient ones.
tulc(that had nothing to do with it I'm sure)

jamesrwright3 · Oct 28, 2008

tulc said:
...and not because they decided to go with the biggest gas sucking machines they could produce instead of more efficient ones.
tulc(that had nothing to do with it I'm sure)

Nope not really. Those machines had high profit margins and the companies were still in trouble even before there was the high cost of oil and the financial crisis.

FTPolice · Oct 28, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
Sorry comparing two different things. Free market/versus forced labors. Every worker in America whether that is in the steel/auto/mining industry is better off. Our auto industry has been run into the ground by the Unions.

Slavery wasn't forced, they could run away or walk off the plantation.

And you're anti union? Why is that? I'm oh so curious.

jamesrwright3 · Oct 28, 2008

FTPolice said:
Slavery wasn't forced, they could run away or walk off the plantation.

And you're anti union? Why is that? I'm oh so curious.

LOL if they walked off the plantation they would be returned if found
Remember the Dred Scott case?

FTPolice · Oct 28, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
LOL if they walked off the plantation they would be returned if found
Remember the Dred Scott case?

He was just lazy and deserved to be return.

bexcellent · Oct 28, 2008

FTPolice said:
Gaaaa! How dare he use government spending to bring us out of the depression.

Good Point! Why should we worry about it when they can just pluck the money off the government money tree?

jamesrwright3 · Oct 28, 2008

FTPolice said:
He was just lazy and deserved to be return.

Are you serious?

FTPolice · Oct 28, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
Are you serious?

Of course. He was free to leave. He may have died of starvation or been killed, but he was compensated with food, clothing and shelter so clearly he stayed of his own volition. There were free black men in the north. How hard could it have been to lie about your identity anyway? He was just too lazy to lie about his name then climb up the corporate ladder or start his own business.

FTPolice · Oct 28, 2008

bexcellent said:
Good Point! Why should we worry about it when they can just pluck the money off the government money tree?

You know it was done by creating jobs right?

Wyzaard · Oct 29, 2008

joebudda said:
What force would this be? Maybe you can use a common example?

The top-down, undemocratic structure of corporate power places all meaningful economic choices in the hands of owners... workers have no choice but to accept the terms of exploitation they are given, or they suffer and/or starve in a money-driven society that offers no alternatives. All attempts to democratize productive forces or create meaningful social alternatives have been brutally crushed over the last couple of centuries.

Wyzaard · Oct 29, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
I like how people say trickle down doesn't work..it enabled us to become the largest economy in the world in a very short amount of time.

If I and most people in this country are not seeing these relative improvements, why should I support them?

Wyzaard · Oct 29, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
Everyone that wants to work hard can succeed. Sure it may take a generation or two for them to become wealthy, but almost anyone that works hard and makes the right choices can attain a middle class standard of living.

Evidence? Your article of faith isn't enough here.

jamesrwright3 · Oct 29, 2008

Wyzaard said:
If I and most people in this country are not seeing these relative improvements, why should I support them?

You have seen those improvements by the standard of living we enjoy today.

FTPolice · Oct 29, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
You have seen those improvements by the standard of living we enjoy today.

Who's "we"? The wealthy? Yea, sure you guys have. "WE" sure haven't though. College tuition has jumped 50% in 8 years under bush, that hasn't raised my standard of living.

jamesrwright3 · Oct 29, 2008

FTPolice said:
Who's "we"? The wealthy? Yea, sure you guys have. "WE" sure haven't though. College tuition has jumped 50% in 8 years under bush, that hasn't raised my standard of living.

Oh I agree there are problems, but the problems are the institutions themselves. Can you tell me how Bush has control of the budgets of every single university, even private ones? One of the problems has been easy credit for students which gets kids indebted and provides incentive for colleges not to control costs since they can pass on any increase to the student.

KarateCowboy · Oct 29, 2008

Wyzaard said:
The top-down, undemocratic structure of corporate power places all meaningful economic choices in the hands of owners... workers have no choice but to accept the terms of exploitation they are given, or they suffer and/or starve in a money-driven society that offers no alternatives. All attempts to democratize productive forces or create meaningful social alternatives have been brutally crushed over the last couple of centuries.

Da Comrade. Owners are not workers. They simply sit around taking money from the proletariat. Forget white collar and blue collar: the future must be brown collar! All attempts to create Social Alternatives and democratize the use of private property have been defeated. However, why should owners be able to make the decisions about their property? It clearly goes against Our Leader's vision for the New Progressive USSA. It is time for the worker's Revolution. Let the streets run red! Obama for all!

TheNewWorldMan · Oct 29, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
You have seen those improvements by the standard of living we enjoy today.

And consider back then, at least among the white population, one working man could support a family in a home.

Nowadays, both husband and wife have to work full-time just to make ends meet, and even then many can't afford a home.

Our standard of living peaked over thirty years ago, if you measure it by how a long an average worker had to work to afford housing, transportation, health care, and leisure.

billwald · Oct 29, 2008

Housing - After WW2 people were happy to have a 1000 sq ft house on a 5000 sq ft lot. Now days people buy 3 of them to tear down for the vacant land.

Car - since WW2 a basic new car has cost about a half year's pay. The difference is that 50 years ago the warranty was 12 months, 12,000 miles. Tires and batteries were good for two years.

Health care would be cheaper if people were satisfied with 1950's health care and meds.

leisure - you gots to be kidding. 50 years ago leisure was a card game on Friday night. Has the cost of that increased?

illudium_phosdex · Oct 30, 2008

Wyzaard said:
The top-down, undemocratic structure of corporate power places all meaningful economic choices in the hands of owners... workers have no choice but to accept the terms of exploitation they are given, or they suffer and/or starve in a money-driven society that offers no alternatives. All attempts to democratize productive forces or create meaningful social alternatives have been brutally crushed over the last couple of centuries.

There has never been any answer so eloquently given and yet so wrong at the same time. I could spend a lot of time ripping this Marxist diatribe apart. But I won't. I simply don't have the time or the inclination.

It is apparent that you hate the rich. That's fine. I can think of other ways to waste your life but whatever. You want to hurt the rich? Here's all you have to do. Put a one time 50% tax on the total value of all trust funds. And if you really want to get them, then go out and tax tax-free municiple bonds. I seriously doubt if the democrats would go for that since most of them live on trust funds and have huge amounts of money in tax-free municiple bonds.

The one chance that we really had for the workers to maintain control of a large portion of capital and the means of production is to privatise social security. Allow my DH to take the money that the government steals from us and invest it in our name in whatever way we want for our retirement. And guess who shot that down? Your freinds in the democrat party. And why would they shoot it down. Because then we wouldn't be dependent on them.

Wyzaard · Oct 30, 2008

jamesrwright3 said:
You have seen those improvements by the standard of living we enjoy today.

Which is lower as compared to previous decades, and far lower when compared to how much work we in the bottom 90% are currently doing... for those in the upper 10%, things are going grandly, but even that won't last if they continue to shirk us, the ones who make this economy run.

Trickle down theory, did it work?

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

jamesrwright3

Guest

Regular Member

jamesrwright3

Guest

Regular Member

Member

jamesrwright3

Guest

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

jamesrwright3

Guest

Regular Member

jamesrwright3

Guest

Classical liberal

phased plasma rifle in 40-watt range

Contributor

Insert witty title here.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency