- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,981
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
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.
Upvote
0