You sure it's not a dup troll account?

I think this list misses the economic issue on which modern conservativism has been most successful - lowering taxes on the wealthy. They were successful during Reagan in doing this, and have continued this as a successful policy priority up through Trump's presidency.

When smart people assert that trickle down economics is fallacious, what they are really saying is that increasing the wealth of rich people helps others to a much lessor degree than if the increase went directly to those poorer people. But lots of people erroneously think that nothing at all trickles down, which defies common sense. That should be made clear when talking about the subject. Similar to the idea that Black Lives Matter people should make it clear that they are asserting that it concerns them that many people think that black lives matter LESS. Not that they think that they don't matter at all.

Why don't people realize that basically true, but moderately exaggerated assertions, do more harm than good when it comes to influencing others.

Imagine thinking that “Black Lives Matter” is an exaggerated proposition.

Yes MSM is left in America like the Dem party is left.

it is left of Republicanism and Trumpism but not left in any type of ideological way.

No MSM media is 'left' ideologically. They are Center/Right and Right, and Extreme Right.

I think the point is mainly that wealth naturally accumulates in a very few hands in an unregulated capitalist system. Obviously when a person who owns 99% of all the wealth there is buys a hot dog, some of his wealth gets released into the general economy to be enjoyed by the people living off of the 1% he doesn't own because he needs to use it for his personal benefit.

(why sit around making hot dogs when you own the cows and people who can make them for you?)

Agree.


Agree and have argued as much and got in trouble before.

Trickle down economics does work but US style trickle down does not as the corporations leverage politics to disempower the workers as things grow so the corporations and their shareholders grab such a disproportionate share of the created wealth it sets workers back.

In a more Free Market society as the economy and corporations had success the employees would share far more and all would be uplifted.

I actually think that average people might do better in a truly unregulated system like Libertopia. A system where hypothetically no coercive forces exist and people are free to negotiate their labour or choose another path.

But we know that cannot and does not exist.

Instead we have a form of Oligarch, Corporatism infused Govt. Which is worse as they can hide behind purchased laws giving citizens very little recourse.

A regulated system where Gov't acts more as arbiter is the fairest one but the US is so far away from that now.

Good points, and I agree that the historical context is helpful.

I’ll take a bet on that .

We love to see any evidences of that ….

If trickle down economy was a success, why such a big wealth gap and gigantic bubble in the stock markets ?
Why US households debts keep increasing ?
Why with 2 parents working with kids it’s never been harder compare 40 years ago when 1 worker was enough for an entire familly ?

Why the poorest states are republicans ?
Why velocity keeps falling ?
Why gdp keeps falling .
Why tax cuts by trump , beside creating trillions in debts , didn’t bring nothing ?

Fwiw , wealth is created by having a job , not by having weaker consumption prices , unless of course your in the the top 15% who owns 80% of the stock market …

I was talking about giving money that comes from elsewhere, to a very rich person. Not giving him money that originally came from poor people to start with. You would be happy if the owner of your company won the Irish lottery even though you would have much preferred that it was won by the large group of fellow employees that all chipped in to buy a few hundred tickets. Because some of those winnings will probably trickle down.

Yeah the word “probably” is often used in economy but with bad results due to unintended consequences.

If you say 1% return for trickle down economy is enough to say it worth it , I won’t dispute that .

But to me a successful economic idea should have a much higher return ,
than a low single digit that do not even reach significant amount of people.

If you can ever find a good numbers of studies (truth is usually derived by massive empirical evidences towards one conclusion , not by a single study that contradict hundreds, right ?) that show trickle down economy concept is a good profitable working idea , I’m all ears .

And in todays society often the best thing a Company can do for over all long term productivity is to Automate and Offshore.

Most larger companies can afford to make this change and absorb the costs to get there, but not every mid and small can.

In your theoretical David, since you seem to be hunting any 'its possible some benefit can trickle down' result then it is also possible that following the lottery win the employees shortly thereafter see layoff notices.

His increased wealth trickled down to their increased poverty.

(and I am neither against automation or outsourcing generally)

I won't answer the rest of your questions because they would be based on opinion and I don't want to enrage the liberals in here (well, more than they are already enraged on a daily basis), but I will answer this one based on facts that you can easily Google. Most of the states on the list of poorest states are in the south and yes, Republican. Also, those same states have the highest percentage of blacks compared to the rest of the US. You do the math.

The exception on the list is New Mexico which is a Democrat state and is among the poorest. A simple Google search will tell you that nearly 48% of New Mexico's population is Latino which is the highest percentage in the country. Once again, you do the math.

Now lets dip into the wealthiest states in the US. Most are Democrat, agreed. They also have very high percentage of whites especially in the areas that generate the most money. So in conclusion, you do the math.

Note this is all based on fact and not opinion that you can easily Google yourself.

"Conservative" platforms that remain are those that intersect with neo liberalism.

1. Reduction in Union power/collective bargaining.
2. Reducing nationalised industries etc.

Thom Hartmann does a little analysis of A Christmas Carol that's pretty illustrative of what we call 'Capitalism'.

It turns out that Scrooge was a member of the middle class which was very small, (he says 1 or 2% but I don't have numbers) who toiled at the behest of the Aristocracy. The other 90+ percent of the population were just plain old working poor.

We have a rich tradition of this type of economic system going back to the feudal days. In America we have an extra hurdle to get over because we were founded as a slave state and had to bake that into the system as well. We're still paying for those sins. As we will until we face them and start moving to actually address the problems that sort of system causes everyone.

And to keep the thread on topic, the GOP/conservatives don't have the answers. They never have and never will. Their solution is to claw your way to the top of the heap or die under it.

West Virginia has about a third of the average population of AA's and they managed to be both Republican and at the bottom of the income list.

Whites are even better at being poor. Do the math.

I used words like "most" for a reason, but your answer is to pick out the one state that works for your agenda and that is the gospel? This is why this forum is so toxic.

As for "whites are even better at being more poor", sure.....if you eliminate most wealthy states. Then maybe you have a case.

Rich considering your posts are cherry picked garbage.

What is also common is Republican Leadership but you want to pretend they are just victims of the demographics and that their decision making is not the issue.

We've seen versions of this argument in the BFI Covid thread where it is has literally been said that 'if not for the dirty Dem voters in the Republican States that were having worse outcomes, they would not be having such bad results'. That the GOP leaders just cannot control that dirty base.

Poor GOP leadership. Always the victims.

Pot, meet kettle.

Right but we are not pretending this is so simple that a singular cherry picked aspect explains it. That is solely you with 'blame the blacks'.

it was pointed out to that looking at the same data the other way West Virginia points out the commonality is actually GOP leadership and that is true. So he sarcastically says you could say 'whites are even better at being poor', which one could say playing your game.

You then reply only ".if you eliminate most wealthy states..." which is also true but they are Dem lead, so...


The broader point being that anyone can cherry pick the data to put forth whatever they want based on their agenda or biases.

So the bigger question is 'what is your agenda or bias's in wanting to turn this towards 'blame the blacks'?

Nah there really is no bigger question. You will believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to believe. Who gives a damn? No need for thousand word posts. Go be happy for once in your life.

You obviously care.

You isolated that singular point to interject with your 'blame the blacks' nonsense which when shown the over riding commonality is Republican Leadership (both in the W.V example and the Rich white example by you), you then hand waved those facts away as they are not convenient to the narrative you admit is one you just 'want to believe'.

Stats don't lie. Ignorance is no excuse.