Are you serious? I don’t recall a single conservative talking about any of Obama’s jobs report in a positive sense. Not a single one and not a single conservative in this board.
He described trickle down.
Yes… although I’m not sure they were conservatives.
Yoo hoo!
1 Like
No, I described the effect of spending multipliers, every dollar spent by the government adds roughly $1.90 to GDP. Trickle down in the form of tax cuts is the least stimulative form of government spending, they don’t even pay for themselves. Tax cuts have a small stimulative effect but relatively poor compared to direct expenditures.
This is why it’s so silly to think about tax cuts increasing tax revenue. The definition of a tax cut is a lowering of tax revenue.
Then the stock response to trying to balance the budget is to cut spending, which is fine if you want to make an economy smaller and have contracting GDP. You don’t grow an economy by taking money out of it.
You didn’t describe that money moving down from government to the people doing the work?
Where does the other 90 cents come from?
Dude, I’m asking you. I didn’t ask for a link.
Ok, supporting increased economic activity. Contractor gets paid for building a school, he can pay his mortgage and buy some new tools.
I get the trickle down part, what I don’t get is the multiplier. Is it because he adds in 90 cents he got from somewhere else?
If everybody is taking a little as it trickles, which I am fine with, how does it increase when it comes back around? Interest?
No he didn’t. He described spending multipliers via demand push government spending. Trickle down is defined as spending multipliers produced by supply side / upper income spending and investment. That’s like saying Obama’s stimulus package was ‘trickle down’.
The Keynsian argument is that direct government spending produces heavier multipliers by increasing aggregate demand more so than tax cuts. This is due to the first instance of spending (the first round of multiplication) being 100% circulated.
What the hell are you talking about? Get away from me.
The goal of the “stimulus” wasn’t for the money to eventually end up in the hands of laborers?
That’s not what trickle down means. Read an economics book.
Trickle down is a STRATEGY for creating multipliers - the entire context ofthe term historically comes from the strategy of increasing supply / investmemt via increases of money circulation of high end incomes. Trivkle dowm is not the multipliers themselves
I didn’t say trickle down is the multipliers. You put it in at the top and it trickles down to the bottom.
If I have more of my money because the government took less, do I spend more or less?
It’s not trickle down. Trickle down is a discredited theory that isn’t even taught in economics other than a passing mention.
You’ve already rejected the reality of spending multipliers out of hand as soon as you heard it for the first time out of an ideological basis and keep trying to reframe multipliers as trickle down because it fits Republican economic policy.
Tax cats are the least stimulative form of government spending, the multiplier is always less than 1, that is they don’t even pay for themselves. Tax cuts are “trickle down”, which is discredited in the field of economics.
The link I posted up is pretty clear on how and why spending multipliers work.
The person you responded to was describing multipliers generally and in thrle context of direct public spending. So, no. Not “trickle down”.
I believe demand drives supply anyway. Not the other way around. Supply will never create demand. But it can unlock demand that people weren’t aware of. But without a demand, supply is pointless. It’s more reason i think that government spending on the poor / middle class works better than big tax cuts on the wealthy
NO! I’m not rejecting anything out of hand, I am struggling to understand. All I want to know is where the other 90 cents comes from.
Trickle down has been discredited? How when it’s how business works?
Apple and Popeye’s might disagree.
Trump has no intention of proposing debt default. Where do you people come up with this nonsense?
