Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

itaest

(26 posts)
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 08:52 PM Jun 2012

43% still believe in trickle-down economics... How can we change that?

This topic has been rehashed many times. But it has not been rehashed by me.

A longer version of this post has been cross-posted at Immizen.com.

Let’s get one thing clear.

Everybody knows that Republicans support the wealthy 1%. So that is clear. (Scroll down to the discussion of a May 25 Post-ABC poll that proves this point.)

What is not so clear to some is that Democrats support both the wealthy 1% from whom they also receive campaign contributions as well as the 99% rest of us.

Some claim that both parties are bought by Wall Street and the big corporations, insinuating that both parties are basically the same.

But that could not be further from the truth. Republicans get their money mostly from big corporate donors. Not so the Democrats.

In a previous post, I reported how big corporations like Walmart donate significantly more money to the Republican party and if they donate to Democrats, it is to those so-called Blue Dogs, who are the ultra conservative Democrats beholden to the big corporations; I call them “Republicans in disguise”. And who donates to Democrats? Well, in 2008, it was mostly the workers unions and individual campaign contributors.

A May 25 Post-ABC poll on Obama, the election, and the economy found that when people were asked the question “Who do you think would do more to advance the economic interests of wealthy Americans - (Obama) or (Romney)?” 24% of people answered Obama and 65% of people answered Romney.

What is surprising then is that people chose 46% Obama to 43% Romney as the answer to this question “Who do you think would do more to advance the economic interests of you and your family - (Obama) or (Romney)?”

How does that make sense?

It seems Republicans were successful at selling the idea that trickle-down economics works. Yes, give the rich more money through subsidies, yeah, let them keep their money and not pay taxes and they will be so generous and hire all of you hard-working Republican voters (we know they think Democratic voters are lazy…)

That is why they think Romney can help the wealthy and the economy more than Obama.

But they are wrong. Wealthy individuals (like the Koch brothers) and big corporations are spending billions to play politics instead of HIRING new workers. Wealthy individuals and big corporations are investing into politicians to get them elected into office (Scott Walker) and then SCREW the American workers.

And if wealthy individuals and big corporations are not spending all their money in political games of power, they spend it on their next trip to Paris or on their next mega Yacht or mansion. Sure, they employ workers, but they are always looking to cut corners and save money, and so they ship jobs overseas and they can do so because they bought the politicians who allow them to do so.

How can we make sure people get it?
That trickle-down economics does not work!


16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

WriteWrong

(85 posts)
1. For all practical purposes, you can't. You have to get them before age 10.
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 09:00 PM
Jun 2012

As Thomas Kuhn pointed out, even scientists, whose entire careers and philosophies depend on abandoning beliefs for new ones as new data comes in, don't change when they need to. They die with the same ideas they were schooled with.

This why the school system is being dismantled, so that whatever they do in the next few years lasts for generations.

 

itaest

(26 posts)
6. Agree. That is why we have to fight for better education for all
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 10:47 PM
Jun 2012

And against crooks like Scott Walker who balances budgets by cutting the education budget - among many other cuts.

 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
4. As observed by Albert Einstein, "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 09:45 PM
Jun 2012

I'm not sure about the former."

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
5. I guess the question is if you can do well when the wealthy are doing badly.
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 09:57 PM
Jun 2012

I wouldn't say a normal person feels they would benefit from the wealthy getting richer but that they feel that indicates a better economy which improves situations for many people including the wealthy and the normal guy.

It's not a zero sum game.

Yavin4

(35,354 posts)
13. That's Not The Question At All
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 02:20 PM
Jun 2012

The question is if trickle down economics, cutting the wealthy's taxes, actually works to increase jobs, and the answer is categorically NO.

The ONLY thing that increases jobs, and subsequently wages, is INCREASED DEMAND. The more customers that you have the more people you will hire to fill the demand.

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
14. Read the OP again...
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 02:32 PM
Jun 2012

"A May 25 Post-ABC poll on Obama, the election, and the economy found that when people were asked the question “Who do you think would do more to advance the economic interests of wealthy Americans - (Obama) or (Romney)?” 24% of people answered Obama and 65% of people answered Romney.

What is surprising then is that people chose 46% Obama to 43% Romney as the answer to this question “Who do you think would do more to advance the economic interests of you and your family - (Obama) or (Romney)?”

How does that make sense?

It seems Republicans were successful at selling the idea that trickle-down economics works. Yes, give the rich more money through subsidies, yeah, let them keep their money and not pay taxes and they will be so generous and hire all of you hard-working Republican voters (we know they think Democratic voters are lazy…) "

I am saying that this may not be the connection they are making. Instead they may feel that policies that advance the economic interests of the wealthy are those that promote growth that also benefits them. It does not have to be trickle down.

Yavin4

(35,354 posts)
15. "Instead they may feel that policies that advance the economic interests of the wealthy are those...
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 06:00 PM
Jun 2012

that promote growth that also benefits them."

That's the very definition of trickle down, and if the American people believe that, then they've been duped or are massively stupid.

Growth only occurs when there's increased economic activity due to higher rates of consumption, not because some rich dude saved 20% on their taxes.

SoutherDem

(2,307 posts)
9. I have been pounding my head against a brick wall on this on for years.
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 03:43 AM
Jun 2012

Yes, people really do believe in Trickle Down Economics. And, in theory if everyone did as they should it MIGHT work. But, everyone won't.

Each time I have seen it tried rather than the ones getting the tax cuts (the rich) reinvesting the money, expanding business, hiring more workers, placing that money back into the system they bank it.
Another name sometimes used for Trickle Down Economics is Supply Side Economics. This was tried under Reagan, Bush and Bush. Each time the economy shrank.

There is another theory out there Flow Up Economics, or Demand Side Economics. In this case you give the tax cuts to the poor, they have more money to spend so they buy more, which means business need more employees, manufactures need to make more, order more supplies. You also, place money in public works projects such as roads and bridges. F.D. Roosevelt and Clinton did this and the economy grew.

One thing to notice one is a trickle and one is a flow. We have documented proof that one works for only the very rich and one works for everyone.

In addition to people still believing in Trickle Down Economics they also feel they too will one day be in the 1%. So they do not want to raise taxes which they one day may need to pay. What are the chances of someone making it to the 1% who doesn't start out close to that point to being with? Very slight, yet people believe it will happen to them.

In my normal goings and comings I don't know even one person who is even close to the 1%. In fact I know very, very few who any of Obama's tax increases would affect them in the slightest way, yet they "feel" they will, like wise I don't know anyone who Romney's tax cut would affect in the slights way, yet they "feel" they will. People are conditioned to like tax cut and hate tax hike, even if it won't affect them.

I know people who if you discuss politics they take the Republican side, but if you discuss the economy without placing political labels on specific items they take the Democratic side. As an example, they feel raising the taxes on the rich is unfair, but they feel the CEO making 400 times what they make is also unfair. They feel what they pay for insurance and the restriction the insurance companies have are unfair but they hate "Obamacare" even if it would save them money and remove those restrictions.

Basically, they are uninformed, misinformed or out right lied to.



Yavin4

(35,354 posts)
12. The ONLY Thing That Makes Businesses Hire More People Is Increased Demand
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 02:18 PM
Jun 2012

Without demand, businesses will contract and lay people off. Taxes DO NOT motivate businesses to hire more people. The rate that an individual or a corp. pay DO NOT matter when it comes to creating jobs. End of story.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»43% still believe in tric...