"Trickle-Up" Economics.

[Lyric]

This seems like the soundest economic theory in the world, to me. What benefits rich people (usually business owners and investors) MORE than poor people who can actually afford to BUY their products??

Obviously the Repukes must see the basic truth of this, too--otherwise, why bother with the economic "stimulus" package? Unfortunately it was too small to make a real difference, but the theory behind it is good. When the lower and middle class is comfortable enough to have some extra cash to spend on the Stuff that the wealthy sell, how is that ANYTHING but fantastic for everyone involved?

[annabanana]

1. Here's the big thing that I NEVER understood about "trickle down"

Nobody hires someone if they can handle the volume of business themselves. You hire someone when more people want what you got than you can give them by yourself.

How on earth can "supply-side" make more sense then "demand-side"?

[av8rdave]

2. Interesting point...

That's one of the things I love about Obama. He repeatedly points out that "trickle down" economics doesn't work.

Al Franken pointed out in his book "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations" that supply - side (trickle down) economics was never taken seriously by any legitimate economist until a few of the lunatic fringe sold the idea to Reagan when he was beginning his White House run. It's been largely accepted by the conservatives as gospel ever since.

Unfortunately, those who benefit from the trickle down theory belong to an exclusive club.

I don't know about you, but I think I've been trickled on enough!

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

3. How much of their assets is the top 1% investing offshore

in foreign money market investments, in foreign banks, or in foreign businesses that they establish abroad? If they don't invest their money in domestic enterprise and in creating jobs in the U.S., then trickle down definitely has a problem.

[Lyric]

4. Exactly. "Trickle-Down" does NOT work because

the wealthy don't spend that money on their United States interests. They don't use the money to create new jobs HERE--they use it to ship jobs overseas in order to pay FAR less in wages and maximize profits. The only people benefiting are the rich. The rest of us never see a dime of that money.

If we did it the other way around and invested money in the lower classes, the standard of living would rise and people would have more disposable income, thereby allowing them to "invest" it in the products that the wealthy produce.

Really, it seems incredibly intelligent and egalitarian. No wonder it's been mostly ignored as an economic theory until now.

[applegrove]

5. Because rich people in America don't want to pay the taxes that they

would have to pay to keep a good healthy middle class in place and they don't care how that happens but it is all about them getting even richer.