Waco1947 said:

---

Economics 101: The Poverty Rate

If you give $500 a month to a rich man, he will put it in his pocket. Eventually, he may invest it in the stock market. If a broker is involved in this transaction, that broker may get a fee. It is only that small portion of the money that may make its way into the overall economy.

If you give $500 a month to a poor family with children,, they will immediately put it into the overall economy. They will buy clothes for the kids, food, books, etc. They may get tutoring for the kids or pay for child care so that both spouses can work. Other Americans and the economy as a whole will benefit.

This option of whether we (the government) should give to the rich or give to the poor has been a bone of contention between conservatives and progressives for decades. The conservatives champion Trickle Down economics by giving the rich tax breaks. You can be the judge yourself of whether that has worked. The progressives kept insisting that giving money directly to the poor will actually be better for the economy as a whole. The progressives' theory has never been tested ... until recently.

The American Rescue Plan enacted by the Biden Administration during the Pandemic, changed the way that the Child Tax Credit is provided to families with children. Under this plan, actual payments (not just a credit at income tax filing) were made to families with children. The payments were up to $300 per month per child and families who made too little income to even pay income tax were able to get the credit for the first time. That is, the families who needed the credit the most were now able to get it. The Child Poverty Rate was cut in half, down to 5.2%. Then, in 2022, the program ended due to the refusal of congressional Republicans aided by Joe Manchin (a Democrat in name only) to renew it. The poverty rate more than doubled to 12.4%.. That's more than 5 million children who briefly enjoyed a middle class life but are now thrust back into poverty. Their families will no longer positively contribute to the economy.

I don't want to tug on your heart strings too much, because I want you to think about yourself. Giving money to the rich through tax cuts or other programs does not improve the economy. We now know that giving money to the poor does. It gets people off of food stamps, welfare and Medicaid while increasing the number of Americans who can pay their fair share.

---

False.

If a person invests $500 that entire amount makes it's way into the economy when the company they invest in uses the money for research, expansion, more jobs, increased wages, etc.

However the company uses it they are more than likely doing so in a fashion that will continue to make more money for people.

If you give it to the poor and they go one time to buy extra food there is a temporary bump in the demand for some items that goes away quickly.

The tax credit took money from those paying taxes and gave it to those who don't pay taxes. In any other arena that is called theft.

We have a free education system and yet the people in Poverty do not want to take advantage of it and encourage their children to break the poverty cycle. They just want handouts of OTHER people's money.

Waco1947 said:

---

Still how has trickle down worked? What's the argument for it?

---

trickle down takes time and it created one of the most successful times in America(from Regan thru Clinton) ending with the Dot com bust

Mothra said:

---

What I want to know is who is the buffoon who gave the OP a blue star?

Do we really have another poster that is as ignorant as 47 on these boards? I didn't think that was possible.

---

The scary thing is supposedly there are 81 million people out there just like him.

Waco1947 said:

---

Still how has trickle down worked? What's the argument for it?

---

Unparalleled prosperity never seen in the history of the world? The fact our poor would qualify as middle to mid upper income globally? Standards of living and access to capital that is incomparable to most of the world?

Waco1947 said:

---

Economics 101: The Poverty Rate

If you give $500 a month to a rich man, he will put it in his pocket. Eventually, he may invest it in the stock market. If a broker is involved in this transaction, that broker may get a fee. It is only that small portion of the money that may make its way into the overall economy.

If you give $500 a month to a poor family with children,, they will immediately put it into the overall economy. They will buy clothes for the kids, food, books, etc. They may get tutoring for the kids or pay for child care so that both spouses can work. Other Americans and the economy as a whole will benefit.

This option of whether we (the government) should give to the rich or give to the poor has been a bone of contention between conservatives and progressives for decades. The conservatives champion Trickle Down economics by giving the rich tax breaks. You can be the judge yourself of whether that has worked. The progressives kept insisting that giving money directly to the poor will actually be better for the economy as a whole. The progressives' theory has never been tested ... until recently.

The American Rescue Plan enacted by the Biden Administration during the Pandemic, changed the way that the Child Tax Credit is provided to families with children. Under this plan, actual payments (not just a credit at income tax filing) were made to families with children. The payments were up to $300 per month per child and families who made too little income to even pay income tax were able to get the credit for the first time. That is, the families who needed the credit the most were now able to get it. The Child Poverty Rate was cut in half, down to 5.2%. Then, in 2022, the program ended due to the refusal of congressional Republicans aided by Joe Manchin (a Democrat in name only) to renew it. The poverty rate more than doubled to 12.4%.. That's more than 5 million children who briefly enjoyed a middle class life but are now thrust back into poverty. Their families will no longer positively contribute to the economy.

I don't want to tug on your heart strings too much, because I want you to think about yourself. Giving money to the rich through tax cuts or other programs does not improve the economy. We now know that giving money to the poor does. It gets people off of food stamps, welfare and Medicaid while increasing the number of Americans who can pay their fair share.

---

Capitalism has created more wealth across the globe than anything else.

Communism-fascism-socialism has created more poverty, death, and misery across the globe than anything else.

Now stop cutting and pasting articles from the child porn groups.

Sounds like 47 didn't work hard enough and is upset the Jones's bought a new car that she can't.

Waco1947 said:

---

Still how has trickle down worked? What's the argument for it?

---

The alternative seems to be to spend until the country goes broke, causing high inflation and the devaluation of the dollar.

Ghostrider said:

---

Sounds like 47 didn't work hard enough and is upset the Jones's bought a new car that she can't.

---

Life choices can certainly be a ***** for 'ministers' without credentials.

And in 47's case its easier to blame everyone else than accept personal responsibility.

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

Entitlement programs and money printing doesn't work.

The US added - checks notes - $275 billion in debt in, uh, ONE DAY

Total US debt is now $33.442 trillion, hit $33 trillion just 2 weeks ago, and on pace to rise by $1 trillion in 1 month.

WTF is going onhttps://t.co/tOrhqmkFXL pic.twitter.com/w3qnBAIfLh

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 3, 2023

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

---

Grooming children by gay fake ministers?

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

---

So you are all for going feudal?
What you support is not only putting the means of wealth and production into the hands of a a few political elite, but also the same hands that control the major weapons of war. Just ask the Russians how hard it is to reform that system. After one very bloody revolution from old feudal to new feudal and a brief taste of freedom 70 years later followed by bloody repression ….

Or ask the Chinese after Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests.
Or the Cambodians
Or the Venezuelans
Or the Poles
Or the Germans
Or the Hungarians
Or the Romanians
Or the Serbians, Croats, and Albanians
Or the Bulgarians
Or the Baltic states
Or the Nicaraguans
Or the Cubans - once they are safely out of their country

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

---

So you are all for going feudal?
What you support is not only putting the means of wealth and production into the hands of a a few political elite, but also the same hands that control the major weapons of war. Just ask the Russians how hard it is to reform that system. After one very bloody revolution from old feudal to new feudal and a brief taste of freedom 70 years later followed by bloody repression ….

Or ask the Chinese after Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests.
Or the Cambodians
Or the Venezuelans
Or the Poles
Or the Germans
Or the Hungarians
Or the Romanians
Or the Serbians, Croats, and Albanians
Or the Bulgarians
Or the Baltic states
Or the Nicaraguans
Or the Cubans - once they are safely out of their country

---

Your point? Feudal is the answer?

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

---

So you are all for going feudal?
What you support is not only putting the means of wealth and production into the hands of a a few political elite, but also the same hands that control the major weapons of war. Just ask the Russians how hard it is to reform that system. After one very bloody revolution from old feudal to new feudal and a brief taste of freedom 70 years later followed by bloody repression ….

Or ask the Chinese after Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests.
Or the Cambodians
Or the Venezuelans
Or the Poles
Or the Germans
Or the Hungarians
Or the Romanians
Or the Serbians, Croats, and Albanians
Or the Bulgarians
Or the Baltic states
Or the Nicaraguans
Or the Cubans - once they are safely out of their country

---

Your point? Feudal is the answer?

---

So it is true. You do just want a modern serf feudal system. You must want a commisar commission to pat you on the head and say, "Good boy! You get an extra piece of bread."

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

---

So you are all for going feudal?
What you support is not only putting the means of wealth and production into the hands of a a few political elite, but also the same hands that control the major weapons of war. Just ask the Russians how hard it is to reform that system. After one very bloody revolution from old feudal to new feudal and a brief taste of freedom 70 years later followed by bloody repression ….

Or ask the Chinese after Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests.
Or the Cambodians
Or the Venezuelans
Or the Poles
Or the Germans
Or the Hungarians
Or the Romanians
Or the Serbians, Croats, and Albanians
Or the Bulgarians
Or the Baltic states
Or the Nicaraguans
Or the Cubans - once they are safely out of their country

---

Your point? Feudal is the answer?

---

So it is true. You do just want a modern serf feudal system. You must want a commisar commission to pat you on the head and say, "Good boy! You get an extra piece of bread."

---

Silly idea. I asked a question

cowboycwr said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Economics 101: The Poverty Rate

If you give $500 a month to a rich man, he will put it in his pocket. Eventually, he may invest it in the stock market. If a broker is involved in this transaction, that broker may get a fee. It is only that small portion of the money that may make its way into the overall economy.

If you give $500 a month to a poor family with children,, they will immediately put it into the overall economy. They will buy clothes for the kids, food, books, etc. They may get tutoring for the kids or pay for child care so that both spouses can work. Other Americans and the economy as a whole will benefit.

This option of whether we (the government) should give to the rich or give to the poor has been a bone of contention between conservatives and progressives for decades. The conservatives champion Trickle Down economics by giving the rich tax breaks. You can be the judge yourself of whether that has worked. The progressives kept insisting that giving money directly to the poor will actually be better for the economy as a whole. The progressives' theory has never been tested ... until recently.

The American Rescue Plan enacted by the Biden Administration during the Pandemic, changed the way that the Child Tax Credit is provided to families with children. Under this plan, actual payments (not just a credit at income tax filing) were made to families with children. The payments were up to $300 per month per child and families who made too little income to even pay income tax were able to get the credit for the first time. That is, the families who needed the credit the most were now able to get it. The Child Poverty Rate was cut in half, down to 5.2%. Then, in 2022, the program ended due to the refusal of congressional Republicans aided by Joe Manchin (a Democrat in name only) to renew it. The poverty rate more than doubled to 12.4%.. That's more than 5 million children who briefly enjoyed a middle class life but are now thrust back into poverty. Their families will no longer positively contribute to the economy.

I don't want to tug on your heart strings too much, because I want you to think about yourself. Giving money to the rich through tax cuts or other programs does not improve the economy. We now know that giving money to the poor does. It gets people off of food stamps, welfare and Medicaid while increasing the number of Americans who can pay their fair share.

---

False.

If a person invests $500 that entire amount makes it's way into the economy when the company they invest in uses the money for research, expansion, more jobs, increased wages, etc.

However the company uses it they are more than likely doing so in a fashion that will continue to make more money for people.

If you give it to the poor and they go one time to buy extra food there is a temporary bump in the demand for some items that goes away quickly.

The tax credit took money from those paying taxes and gave it to those who don't pay taxes. In any other arena that is called theft.

We have a free education system and yet the people in Poverty do not want to take advantage of it and encourage their children to break the poverty cycle. They just want handouts of OTHER people's money.

---

The problem with your argument isn't assumes the best intentions of the wealthy and the worse habits of the poor. A few examples as your response is long.


Companies that reinvest into improving the business do trickle opportunities down to their employees. However, in this interaction of corporate America, corporations buy back their stock to boost the price and then give the money to leadership as bonuses. That money does not benefit the economy as you can own only so many refrigerators.

On the other hand, if $25M bonus was paid out to employees, it would flow through the economy.

As for education, sure, some people don't work to improve their situation. But that's not the only reason people are poor. There are many reasons. Some are poor because they don't live where the opportunities are. Others are poor because corporate raiders bankrupted the company and took their retirement. Some people have illnesses that took their savings or jobs.

It's more nuanced than you noted.

The same is true for wealth. Some are wealthy because of no reason of their own. Gov of Illinois is wealthy by birth. Greg Abbott is wealthy because he was hit by a tree.

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Socialism, communism, and fascism are just modernized feudal systems. Wealth is controlled by the political elite and doled out to the peasants ("workers") just enough to keep them from revolting. Grievances are resolved by courts controlled by the political elite. Peasants must not argue with the elite lest they lose what they are being "given."

Those systems will become less vibrant and more caste-like over time.

---

And the alternative?

---

So you are all for going feudal?
What you support is not only putting the means of wealth and production into the hands of a a few political elite, but also the same hands that control the major weapons of war. Just ask the Russians how hard it is to reform that system. After one very bloody revolution from old feudal to new feudal and a brief taste of freedom 70 years later followed by bloody repression ….

Or ask the Chinese after Tiananmen Square and Hong Kong protests.
Or the Cambodians
Or the Venezuelans
Or the Poles
Or the Germans
Or the Hungarians
Or the Romanians
Or the Serbians, Croats, and Albanians
Or the Bulgarians
Or the Baltic states
Or the Nicaraguans
Or the Cubans - once they are safely out of their country

---

Your point? Feudal is the answer?

---

So it is true. You do just want a modern serf feudal system. You must want a commisar commission to pat you on the head and say, "Good boy! You get an extra piece of bread."

---

Silly idea. I asked a question

---

I don't really believe you misunderstood my post at all. Your question isn't really a question. I gave the answer to what you intended.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Economics 101: The Poverty Rate

If you give $500 a month to a rich man, he will put it in his pocket. Eventually, he may invest it in the stock market. If a broker is involved in this transaction, that broker may get a fee. It is only that small portion of the money that may make its way into the overall economy.

If you give $500 a month to a poor family with children,, they will immediately put it into the overall economy. They will buy clothes for the kids, food, books, etc. They may get tutoring for the kids or pay for child care so that both spouses can work. Other Americans and the economy as a whole will benefit.

This option of whether we (the government) should give to the rich or give to the poor has been a bone of contention between conservatives and progressives for decades. The conservatives champion Trickle Down economics by giving the rich tax breaks. You can be the judge yourself of whether that has worked. The progressives kept insisting that giving money directly to the poor will actually be better for the economy as a whole. The progressives' theory has never been tested ... until recently.

The American Rescue Plan enacted by the Biden Administration during the Pandemic, changed the way that the Child Tax Credit is provided to families with children. Under this plan, actual payments (not just a credit at income tax filing) were made to families with children. The payments were up to $300 per month per child and families who made too little income to even pay income tax were able to get the credit for the first time. That is, the families who needed the credit the most were now able to get it. The Child Poverty Rate was cut in half, down to 5.2%. Then, in 2022, the program ended due to the refusal of congressional Republicans aided by Joe Manchin (a Democrat in name only) to renew it. The poverty rate more than doubled to 12.4%.. That's more than 5 million children who briefly enjoyed a middle class life but are now thrust back into poverty. Their families will no longer positively contribute to the economy.

I don't want to tug on your heart strings too much, because I want you to think about yourself. Giving money to the rich through tax cuts or other programs does not improve the economy. We now know that giving money to the poor does. It gets people off of food stamps, welfare and Medicaid while increasing the number of Americans who can pay their fair share.

---

False.

If a person invests $500 that entire amount makes it's way into the economy when the company they invest in uses the money for research, expansion, more jobs, increased wages, etc.

However the company uses it they are more than likely doing so in a fashion that will continue to make more money for people.

If you give it to the poor and they go one time to buy extra food there is a temporary bump in the demand for some items that goes away quickly.

The tax credit took money from those paying taxes and gave it to those who don't pay taxes. In any other arena that is called theft.

We have a free education system and yet the people in Poverty do not want to take advantage of it and encourage their children to break the poverty cycle. They just want handouts of OTHER people's money.

---

The problem with your argument isn't assumes the best intentions of the wealthy and the worse habits of the poor. A few examples as your response is long.


Companies that reinvest into improving the business do trickle opportunities down to their employees. However, in this interaction of corporate America, corporations buy back their stock to boost the price and then give the money to leadership as bonuses. That money does not benefit the economy as you can own only so many refrigerators.

On the other hand, if $25M bonus was paid out to employees, it would flow through the economy.

As for education, sure, some people don't work to improve their situation. But that's not the only reason people are poor. There are many reasons. Some are poor because they don't live where the opportunities are. Others are poor because corporate raiders bankrupted the company and took their retirement. Some people have illnesses that took their savings or jobs.

It's more nuanced than you noted.

The same is true for wealth. Some are wealthy because of no reason of their own. Gov of Illinois is wealthy by birth. Greg Abbott is wealthy because he was hit by a tree.

---

False. Even if the CEOs are given bonuses that money goes back into the economy. When they invest that money (in stocks or various bank investments) the money goes back to the economy. The only way it doesn't is if someone puts it under their mattress.

And yes there are outliers to why people are poor but for the vast majority it is because they are not taking advantage of what is out there, getting better jobs, working hard, etc.

We are the greatest country in the world. Theer has never been a more successful country than the US, but dems still find fault b/c they believe in a utopia. Dems prefer everyone to suffer equally.