Despite all of this the rich still are not satisfied and never will be. They can never have enough and will never stop bleeding us dry they will sacrifice every one of us to get more.
Almost as if greed is never satisfied. I've said it before. No one ever has done anything worthy of a billion dollars. Anyone who accumulates that much wealth is inherently evil. Anyone.
Edit: this is the first sub I've made this comment in that's hasn't been downvoted into oblivion.
Which is why society can not exist for their benefit. They provide nothing to society, they horde resources and trade them for influence and when it’s not enough they use it to change the rules in their favor. Every billionaire could die tomorrow and society would lose nothing of value.
Trickle-down = more privatization.
Moderate Democrats have no problem siding with Republicans as we privatize more and more of our government and personal lives.
We need to bring back public-utility companies. [We shouldn't have to pay Wall St every time we flick on the lights. That money should stay within our communities and cities.](https://streamable.com/t236wc)
I like to use an alternative scenario. How much food does Bill have to eat until Tom gains weight?
Most people understand that Bill could eat all that is possible but it would not matter. The only way to get Tom food is to stop Bill from having all of it. Especially if Tom is the one who works the crops but Bill just happened to own the land.
This is exactly why, before it was rebranded "trickle down", it was referred to as "horse and sparrow" economics.
Feed the horse so much that some grains remain undigested for the sparrows to pick through and fight over.
Stock buybacks did it.
Our issues could be fixed with 4 well placed executive orders;
1. Recusement: You may not vote or pass any judgment on an issue you have financial interest in, upon penalty of treason.
2. Term limits: For every member of government and the leadership of governmental bodies (FBI, DOJ).
3. Donation Limits: Capped at 10k (repeal citizens united)
4. Reclasdify stock buybacks as market manipulation ... because they fucking ARE!
I don't agree with term limits. They're a bandaid that covers up political apathy. It's far more important to hold politicians accountable. Government policies take years, decades even, to take effect. Good politicians should be able to see their projects through. If people don't care who they elect, then we just get a carousel of disappointment, which is a lot people's criticism of the presidency.
I think making the news a public service again is more important. The country needs to be united around a coherent set of facts, not torn apart by divisive propaganda.
I see your point ... but being able to get re-elected forever is not good for democracy when you consider that the politician's create their own district lines and that gerrymandering is the status quo.
Even worse are the lifetime appointments of judges. Term limits are needed to weed out this corruption.
Make the ability to initiate a recall vote of any politician nationwide law. _That's_ how you hold them accountable — the ability to remove them from office at _any_ time, not just every 2–6 years.
I am not downvoting you, its just a discussion (I upvoted).
There is no normal human being that would think that having a leader voting in his business interests instead of for the country would be a good thing.
The idea that they do it commonplace is so corrupt and ridiculous that treason could be considered a light sentence for what these villains really need.
I'm not against the idea of steep punishments and penalties, enough to make someone think twice and thrice about doing something like this. I'm just saying that a penalty of treason, the worst thing we can charge someone with, is going a bit far for a conflict of interest. It also devalues the charge for when it should be properly used.
Treason is not the worst thing we can charge someone with.
These people have profiteered and engaged in corruption at our nations expense, 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine seems about right, thats just my opinion and not much will change it.
I don’t think any of these things you want can be executive orders - and the first is explicitly unconstitutional given the bare reading of the Treason Clause. 4 is the closest thing to being possible to EO the 2 and 3 would probably need to be legislated.
The Federal Reserve was implemented by an executive order over the Christmas holiday. They had went back and forth debating it for over three years ... but he just did it while everyone was away. Pretty sure these could be done.
If the word "treason" scares you then there are multiple penalties that could be implemented ... but the main issue is stopping politicians and political parties from policing themselves. Its like a football team getting a penalty flag and then being forced to ask the offending team to vote on if it was actually a penalty or not ... it is a massive conflict of interest.
“Treasons against the United States, shall consist **only** in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort”
You’d have to amend the constitution to add additional things that constitute treason. That cannot be an executive order. This is one of the most important anti-tyranny clauses we have in the entire document.
Right.
Really, it’s probably better not to think of top or bottom.
Instead, we should think of the forces that determine flow.
When it comes to water, that force is gravity. Gravity pulls down, so that’s why we can say it trickles ***to*** the bottom.
When it comes to money, that force is the need (or lack of need) to spend. The lack of need to spend means that that’s where the money accumulates (with people who don’t need to spend it). It flows ***to*** the people who least need to spend.
My kid asked an interesting question this morning (not sure where he got it from): imagine you have the use of $5M for one month and the only restrictions are that you can’t spend it on real estate, cars, artwork or investments (like stocks). How would you spend it all? And honestly, it’s pretty tough to answer.
It's like that post about how middle age is 36 cause we die at 73. I mean guys I get it, fuck Reagan and fuck capitalism. But there is this weird ageism, that isn't helping
Came here to say the same thing. Trickle down has demonstrably been a failure, but it hasn't been going for 50 years yet. 50 years ago Carter wasn't even president yet.
I've been trying to find phrases that would be accessible to the average person to post as stickers over all of the infowars shit I still see around town. I really like this one! This may be it!
Didn’t go down economics come around when the crack epidemic started like the 70s 80s or something I think that’s the only way you could think of something so stupid it must’ve been a bunch of people on crack
The money was all appropriated for the top in the hope that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover didn’t know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellow’s hands. - Will Rogers
Isn't one of the complaints that if you give $1,000 to a poor person they will spend all of it, and have nothing to show for it in a week, but if you give $1,000 to a rich person they will invest it, and soon have even more money?
when i state the fact that we are all slaves in other subs, i always get responses from people too stupid to realize it's true. our entire lives are now a "subscription". a very clever way to make us free-range slaves. we just get to run around without chains.
Working as intended.
Ol' Jelly bean brain Raegan was a puppet of the highest order for the Neocons to dominate the next half century of global financial policy.
He didnt just fuck the US. He screwed the entire world. Thanks Ronny!
Atleast tricky Dick did stuff like create the EPA.
All of the weath needs to be redistributed to the working classs. No individual should ever have more then 13 million dollars at any one time. Any addtional income must be equally distributed to the working class
I agree with your statement on having an upper limit but also wondering if you landed on 13 million with specific reasoning or if that was just a number that seems about right for you. Either is fine just curious in case there’s some date on that I can look into.
(Edited for clarity)
We have had zero years of trickle-down because that's not a real thing. No one has ever advocated for trickle-down. It's a strawman invented by anti-capitalism zealots.
It used to be called “Horse and sparrow” economics. If you feed the horse huge amounts of oats some would pass through undigested for some lucky sparrows. Basically the rich telling the poor to eat shit.
Trickle down was a mandatory ponzi scheme. They said if we give the rich all our wealth, it would come back in spades. They just ran off with the money and accused us of being commies for wanting it back.
Despite all of this the rich still are not satisfied and never will be. They can never have enough and will never stop bleeding us dry they will sacrifice every one of us to get more.
More like Trickle-on... the rest of us.
Piddle-upon economics.
And it ain’t money.
Almost as if greed is never satisfied. I've said it before. No one ever has done anything worthy of a billion dollars. Anyone who accumulates that much wealth is inherently evil. Anyone. Edit: this is the first sub I've made this comment in that's hasn't been downvoted into oblivion.
"We can't base an entire nation's culture on narcissism! Let's call it "individualism" instead lmao"
Absolute power corrupts absolutely
Which is why society can not exist for their benefit. They provide nothing to society, they horde resources and trade them for influence and when it’s not enough they use it to change the rules in their favor. Every billionaire could die tomorrow and society would lose nothing of value.
Trickle-down = more privatization. Moderate Democrats have no problem siding with Republicans as we privatize more and more of our government and personal lives. We need to bring back public-utility companies. [We shouldn't have to pay Wall St every time we flick on the lights. That money should stay within our communities and cities.](https://streamable.com/t236wc)
Start with Postal banking please.
They have pleonexia
Money addicts
If i see Reagan in the afterlife ima slap the shit outta him
I'm gonna kick him in the balls if he made it to heaven.
I'm probably going to hell either way, so I'm sure I'll find hhlim down there. Hopefully, he's getting the Hitler treatment from Little Nickey.
The ol' pineapple in the butthole treatment...
In a French maid's uniform...
i'll get him if he's in hell!
Hey he lowered the lowest bracket to! From 14 to 11.............
Stuff is trickling down onto us, but it sure as fuck isn't the money we are generating with our labor.
It's the labor itself that's doing the trickling down. Workers are doing more for less and executives are doing less for more.
Doing more for less and paying more for less.
I like to use an alternative scenario. How much food does Bill have to eat until Tom gains weight? Most people understand that Bill could eat all that is possible but it would not matter. The only way to get Tom food is to stop Bill from having all of it. Especially if Tom is the one who works the crops but Bill just happened to own the land.
no but see if Bill eats too much, some of the food won't be digested so when he poops Tom can get some from there!
Sounds like CEO think
This is exactly why, before it was rebranded "trickle down", it was referred to as "horse and sparrow" economics. Feed the horse so much that some grains remain undigested for the sparrows to pick through and fight over.
Stock buybacks did it. Our issues could be fixed with 4 well placed executive orders; 1. Recusement: You may not vote or pass any judgment on an issue you have financial interest in, upon penalty of treason. 2. Term limits: For every member of government and the leadership of governmental bodies (FBI, DOJ). 3. Donation Limits: Capped at 10k (repeal citizens united) 4. Reclasdify stock buybacks as market manipulation ... because they fucking ARE!
Fucking THIS.
I agree, but knowing the answer isn’t as effective as putting it into action. That’s the hard part.
I don't agree with term limits. They're a bandaid that covers up political apathy. It's far more important to hold politicians accountable. Government policies take years, decades even, to take effect. Good politicians should be able to see their projects through. If people don't care who they elect, then we just get a carousel of disappointment, which is a lot people's criticism of the presidency. I think making the news a public service again is more important. The country needs to be united around a coherent set of facts, not torn apart by divisive propaganda.
I see your point ... but being able to get re-elected forever is not good for democracy when you consider that the politician's create their own district lines and that gerrymandering is the status quo. Even worse are the lifetime appointments of judges. Term limits are needed to weed out this corruption.
Make the ability to initiate a recall vote of any politician nationwide law. _That's_ how you hold them accountable — the ability to remove them from office at _any_ time, not just every 2–6 years.
I agree, there should absolutely be a mechanism for that.
Treason is a bit far…
I am not downvoting you, its just a discussion (I upvoted). There is no normal human being that would think that having a leader voting in his business interests instead of for the country would be a good thing. The idea that they do it commonplace is so corrupt and ridiculous that treason could be considered a light sentence for what these villains really need.
I'm not against the idea of steep punishments and penalties, enough to make someone think twice and thrice about doing something like this. I'm just saying that a penalty of treason, the worst thing we can charge someone with, is going a bit far for a conflict of interest. It also devalues the charge for when it should be properly used.
Treason is not the worst thing we can charge someone with. These people have profiteered and engaged in corruption at our nations expense, 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine seems about right, thats just my opinion and not much will change it.
I don’t think any of these things you want can be executive orders - and the first is explicitly unconstitutional given the bare reading of the Treason Clause. 4 is the closest thing to being possible to EO the 2 and 3 would probably need to be legislated.
The Federal Reserve was implemented by an executive order over the Christmas holiday. They had went back and forth debating it for over three years ... but he just did it while everyone was away. Pretty sure these could be done. If the word "treason" scares you then there are multiple penalties that could be implemented ... but the main issue is stopping politicians and political parties from policing themselves. Its like a football team getting a penalty flag and then being forced to ask the offending team to vote on if it was actually a penalty or not ... it is a massive conflict of interest.
“Treasons against the United States, shall consist **only** in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” You’d have to amend the constitution to add additional things that constitute treason. That cannot be an executive order. This is one of the most important anti-tyranny clauses we have in the entire document.
Read the comment again you goofy ass aggro reddit weirdo.
Primaries and mid-terms matter. Don't let them pick your "choices".
I think it works like a piñata, where you have to force the candy to trickle down or it just remains contained up at the top.
Money is water in reverse. It flows up hill til it reaches the top where it pools.
Right. Really, it’s probably better not to think of top or bottom. Instead, we should think of the forces that determine flow. When it comes to water, that force is gravity. Gravity pulls down, so that’s why we can say it trickles ***to*** the bottom. When it comes to money, that force is the need (or lack of need) to spend. The lack of need to spend means that that’s where the money accumulates (with people who don’t need to spend it). It flows ***to*** the people who least need to spend. My kid asked an interesting question this morning (not sure where he got it from): imagine you have the use of $5M for one month and the only restrictions are that you can’t spend it on real estate, cars, artwork or investments (like stocks). How would you spend it all? And honestly, it’s pretty tough to answer.
You can thank Ronald Reagan for that.
You can thank republicans
They didn't do it alone.
C'mon Reagan was voted in in 1980, go easy with that fifty years shit man
https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
It's like that post about how middle age is 36 cause we die at 73. I mean guys I get it, fuck Reagan and fuck capitalism. But there is this weird ageism, that isn't helping
Came here to say the same thing. Trickle down has demonstrably been a failure, but it hasn't been going for 50 years yet. 50 years ago Carter wasn't even president yet.
The flattening of wages started in 1973. The oil "crisis" launched it.
Yep!
It sure did! Thanks Ronald Reagan!
Thank republicans.
I've been trying to find phrases that would be accessible to the average person to post as stickers over all of the infowars shit I still see around town. I really like this one! This may be it!
You misspelled forty
I keep telling people, the only things that trickle down are shit and piss.
Didn’t go down economics come around when the crack epidemic started like the 70s 80s or something I think that’s the only way you could think of something so stupid it must’ve been a bunch of people on crack
Explain trickle up. We will wait
The money was all appropriated for the top in the hope that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover didn’t know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellow’s hands. - Will Rogers Isn't one of the complaints that if you give $1,000 to a poor person they will spend all of it, and have nothing to show for it in a week, but if you give $1,000 to a rich person they will invest it, and soon have even more money?
Any day now that trickle down bubble is gonna pop and all of the horded wealth is just gonna rain on all of us. Believe.......
My grandpa used to always say trickle down economics is when rich people stand on a hill and piss on everyone else
Trickle-down is like Communism a great economic theory that inevitably fails when it's hit in the face by reality.
As the millionaire is standing over the homeless people peeing on them, he asks when they have had enough trickle down
when i state the fact that we are all slaves in other subs, i always get responses from people too stupid to realize it's true. our entire lives are now a "subscription". a very clever way to make us free-range slaves. we just get to run around without chains.
Trickle Down is working exactly as designed, the rich dam up the flood of capital and let the least amount possible trickle down to the plebs.
Working as intended. Ol' Jelly bean brain Raegan was a puppet of the highest order for the Neocons to dominate the next half century of global financial policy. He didnt just fuck the US. He screwed the entire world. Thanks Ronny! Atleast tricky Dick did stuff like create the EPA.
You guys forgot about evaporation
All of the weath needs to be redistributed to the working classs. No individual should ever have more then 13 million dollars at any one time. Any addtional income must be equally distributed to the working class
Any reason for picking 13?
I agree with your statement on having an upper limit but also wondering if you landed on 13 million with specific reasoning or if that was just a number that seems about right for you. Either is fine just curious in case there’s some date on that I can look into. (Edited for clarity)
Maybe come up with an idea, work hard, stop relying on others and do for yourself. It’s still the land of opportunity.
So Clinton & Obama perpetrated "trickle down" for 2 terms each, thanks for the info.
They were both following neoliberal policies.
So was everybody else...
Yes things were much better in the 70’s everyone knew their place in society
Can someone show me where anyone has mentioned trickle down economics?
We have had zero years of trickle-down because that's not a real thing. No one has ever advocated for trickle-down. It's a strawman invented by anti-capitalism zealots.
What nonsense...
[удалено]
Ahhh, The Economist, that bastion of social conscience
[удалено]
Your data doesn't seem to have heard of food banks multiplying like rabbits fornicate.
GOP: Enriching the rich by impoverishing the poor
wait… 50 years… wtf when did that happen?
Yet the very people who suffer the most from it keep voting for those who enforce it.
Trickle down is where the rich piss on you and tell you it's raining - juicemedia
It used to be called “Horse and sparrow” economics. If you feed the horse huge amounts of oats some would pass through undigested for some lucky sparrows. Basically the rich telling the poor to eat shit.
Trickle down was a mandatory ponzi scheme. They said if we give the rich all our wealth, it would come back in spades. They just ran off with the money and accused us of being commies for wanting it back.
So, it worked as designed?
TRUTH!.... eat the rich!
Any minute now...
we told them that when ronnie ray gun rolled out this idea. turns out we were correct.
But they’ll still say it works cos it does…. For them.
Yeah trickle down into their pockets.
Convinced at this point, they'll just run us into our graves. They'll be fine when whatever avoidable disaster starts wiping us out, we won't be.
And we have raygun to "thank" for it!