patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,363,655 comments by 15,741 users - Al_Sharpton_for_President online now
I told you there is no such a thing as trickle down theory. The rich hoard the money.
2018 Jul 19, 9:40am 8,699 views 31 comments
by Nobody follow (0)
« First « Previous Comments 25 - 31 of 31 Search these comments
25
Strategist
2018 Jul 19, 8:23pm
Strategist
2018 Jul 19, 8:23pm
Booger says
Yup, 401K's are all due to labor unions. And social security, and welfare.
jazz_music saysThose retirees are there because of benefits hard won for them by labor unions.
Labor Unions are responsible for 401K's?
Yup, 401K's are all due to labor unions. And social security, and welfare.
26
Reality
2018 Jul 19, 8:51pm
If the original poster was sending his post from a desktop/laptop computer, his very action of posting was the result of trickle-down: trickling from a $10,000 command-line business machine that all the best known industrial leaders at the time "knew" nobody would ever want one for home, down to a sub-$500 device that he could post from.
If the original poster was sending his post from a smart phone, his very action of posting was the result of trickle-down: trickling from a $5000 brief-case phone that only the C-level executives could afford (and could only make phone calls) down to a handy multi-functional device found in the pockets of even the poorest members of society today.
The point of money is not money per se, but what you can buy with it. Private entrepreneurs are far better at offering up goods for purchase by individuals than governments central planners are able to deliver. Would you rather prefer the same wages but better/more products to buy for the same money over time (because of entrepreneurs competing to make improvements), or would you rather prefer rapidly increasing nominal wages but can't even buy toilet paper with the wages like in Venezuela after a couple decades of socialism?
Tax-cut is not giving money to the rich, but letting millions of competent entrepreneurs use their own resources to compete against each other in offering different choices for consumers, instead of letting a few thousand central planners colluding to confiscate the resources and forcing consumers/citizens into "government"-mandated "free shit." Do you prefer to be a free customer able to choose from which farm/store you'd like to buy your food, or do you prefer to become a plantation slave and get your free food, along with free education, free housing, and free clothing, all at the discretion of the slave owner?
Funny the guy should mention Steve Jobs when pushing his agenda of wasting more confiscated money on worthless liberal arts education (the type that needs government support because the market won't pay for it): does he even know that Steve Jobs was a college dropout?
If the original poster was sending his post from a smart phone, his very action of posting was the result of trickle-down: trickling from a $5000 brief-case phone that only the C-level executives could afford (and could only make phone calls) down to a handy multi-functional device found in the pockets of even the poorest members of society today.
The point of money is not money per se, but what you can buy with it. Private entrepreneurs are far better at offering up goods for purchase by individuals than governments central planners are able to deliver. Would you rather prefer the same wages but better/more products to buy for the same money over time (because of entrepreneurs competing to make improvements), or would you rather prefer rapidly increasing nominal wages but can't even buy toilet paper with the wages like in Venezuela after a couple decades of socialism?
Tax-cut is not giving money to the rich, but letting millions of competent entrepreneurs use their own resources to compete against each other in offering different choices for consumers, instead of letting a few thousand central planners colluding to confiscate the resources and forcing consumers/citizens into "government"-mandated "free shit." Do you prefer to be a free customer able to choose from which farm/store you'd like to buy your food, or do you prefer to become a plantation slave and get your free food, along with free education, free housing, and free clothing, all at the discretion of the slave owner?
Funny the guy should mention Steve Jobs when pushing his agenda of wasting more confiscated money on worthless liberal arts education (the type that needs government support because the market won't pay for it): does he even know that Steve Jobs was a college dropout?
27
Reality
2018 Jul 19, 9:02pm
jazz_music says
The tyranny of these overgrown corporations and banks can only exist because of government-granted monopolies. Otherwise, what's preventing competition from emerging?
Do you prefer to have a monopoly forced upon you (as in both government bureaucrats and government-granted monopoly benefiting "private" corporation), or do you prefer having more freedom/liberty to choose? Do you think the service-provider will treat you better because they have a monopoly over you or do you think they will treat you better if you have a choice ?
Liberals, on the other hand want to drive their government to SIGNIFICANT solve problems that MOST people are facing under the tyranny of these overgrown corporations and banks.
The tyranny of these overgrown corporations and banks can only exist because of government-granted monopolies. Otherwise, what's preventing competition from emerging?
Do you prefer to have a monopoly forced upon you (as in both government bureaucrats and government-granted monopoly benefiting "private" corporation), or do you prefer having more freedom/liberty to choose? Do you think the service-provider will treat you better because they have a monopoly over you or do you think they will treat you better if you have a choice ?
28
Strategist
2018 Jul 19, 9:09pm
Strategist
2018 Jul 19, 9:09pm
Reality says
Sadly, communists will never understand all this. They will reprove Einstein's theory of insanity again and again, and still never quit. I actually don't mind, because it's fun to kick commie ass.
If the original poster was sending his post from a desktop computer, his very action of posting was the result of trickle-down: trickling from a $10,000 command-line business machine that all the best known industrial leaders at the time "knew" nobody would ever want one for home, down to a sub-$500 device that he could post from.
If the original poster was sending his post from a smart phone, his very action of posting was the result of trickle-down: trickling from a $5000 brief-case phone that only the C-level executives could afford (and could only make phone calls) down to a handy multi-functional device found in the pockets of even the poorest members of society today.
The point of money is not money per se, but what you can buy with it. Private entrepreneurs are far better at offering up goods for purchase by individuals than governments central planners are able to deliver. Would you rather prefer the same wages but better/more products to buy for the same money ov...
Sadly, communists will never understand all this. They will reprove Einstein's theory of insanity again and again, and still never quit. I actually don't mind, because it's fun to kick commie ass.
29
Reality
2018 Jul 19, 9:20pm
MAGAbrush says
Defined benefit pension plan was a scam tying employees to a sinking ship. Every corporation eventually dies (when its market position is no longer profitable), usually after the executives raid the pension funds. Employers liked pension plans because they didn't have to pay up-front; labor bosses liked pension plans because they could pretend they won something and therefore could take a cut up front without waiting for the life-long vestment period on the commission.
Labor unions fought for defined benefit pensions.
Defined benefit pension plan was a scam tying employees to a sinking ship. Every corporation eventually dies (when its market position is no longer profitable), usually after the executives raid the pension funds. Employers liked pension plans because they didn't have to pay up-front; labor bosses liked pension plans because they could pretend they won something and therefore could take a cut up front without waiting for the life-long vestment period on the commission.
30
Strategist
2018 Jul 19, 9:23pm
Strategist
2018 Jul 19, 9:23pm
MAGAbrush says
If they were doing good for the masses I wouldn't have to do that.
Strategist saysSadly, communists will never understand all this. They will reprove Einstein's theory of insanity again and again, and still never quit. I actually don't mind, because it's fun to kick commie ass.
Which for unfathomable reasons you must do any time someone talks about using democracy to accomplish some good for the masses.
Why do you do that?
If they were doing good for the masses I wouldn't have to do that.
« First « Previous Comments 25 - 31 of 31 Search these comments
When do people realize that giving the tax breaks to the rich will not boost the wage. They will hoard the money
and pay their debt, if there is any. This is what is happening. The rich hoard money. Buying back the stock is not
going to boost economy or adding jobs, it will only increase the company's net worth. It won't even increase the output.
When do people realize giving money to the rich will not boost economy?
If we have money, why not spend that on investing into our children? (Please don't argue about the fact that we are spending
a lot already. I am saying if we have money to give to the rich, spend it on our kids. Use that money to create more seats at
universities and colleges. Most of the seats are filled with foreigners who are willing to pay more. This really sucks, because our
parents and grand parents paid to make these institutions. And their kids are not allowed to study there, because the foreigners are
taking up their seats.) It is simple; it was Steve Jobs and his employees who created the iPhone. And people who believed in it made
the investment. Not because they had the tax break.