I believe "trickle down" works, just not as many people think.I've noticed a lot of people think trickle down means well the boss is rich so I am going to be rich.Trickle down more describes how those at the top are doing well and therefore can do things such as hire more people, expand operations, perhaps afford higher salaries, bonuses etc Worked well in the past and would prob work better.The problem is it needs to be sold in a realistic fashion, clarify how it actually works.The problem with that is many American's today believe it is the government's job to "level the playing field" instead of taking on the fight themselves.The playing field is basically level, sure some start with more advantages but that is life.Plenty of people have came from really horrible circumstances and "made it" without the government "helping them"


Say what you want about , but it certainly works better than Obama's "trickle down poverty" of the last two years.:yeah:

Why i say trickle down doesn't work, is because, quite simply, they are not doing that. In fact, they do they exact opposite, and the only ones who see higher salaries or bonuses are upper management.

We, the cubicle plebes, are regarded as nothing more then cogs. Expendable, replaceable, with no long term value, therego no investment is made. Meaning, no 401K matching of any sort, no bonuses, no raises, no nothing. All of that was revoked, and replaced with a happy tap dance, and (metaphorically speaking) a large cumbersome object rammed up our hindquarters, all the while getting that great big upper management smile while they pretend to be our best buddy.

Trickle down.. yeah.. tell me another one. From what i've seen, anyone who believes in that is living in a freaking dream world. Maybe i can sell them oceanfront property in arizona - they might just buy it.

No we're not currently on a trickle down thing, I agree.There were times in the past it worked.The only thing trickling down these days is poverty and the tingle in Chris Matthew's leg.

Yeah i'm bitter. I fully expect to be laid off either on the 20th of this month, or the 3rd of january. I'll be amazed if im still employed by febuary.

Then again, i've been here for a little over a decade. I'ts been great. Great hours, great coworkers, and up until the last year or so, great managers. Working here didn't seem like a job, but a way of life. So, its been a great run, i don't think i'll be angry when i get that call to see HR, all good things come to an end eventually.

edit:
ANd yeah, i'll be filing for unemployment too. If i've been paying into it for the last 10+ years, your damn right i am.

I know it does nothing to help, and sounds quaint, but I am really sorry to hear all of that. :cry:

Does anyone really know what trickle means?
A small, slow, or irregular quantity of anything coming, going, or proceeding.
Note the irregular part.

Around 1995 i got tired of working in a Factory and quit.
I started an ISP and ran that for awhile.
Sold it and went into Construction cause I love doing that type work.
I have NEVER collected so called 'benefits' or asked for help with my business.
When stuff hit the fan?
I had to layoff the Guys that worked for and with me.
That was probably the lowest point in my working life.
Sure it was only 7 Guys Max.
But I was the one that wrote them Good checks every week.
I took care of them on road and made sure the Rooms were nice and never far from needed services.
They worked hard, long hours.

You know what trickle down did for me and them?
Not a DAMNED thing!

I'd post about the last 'Trickle down' I actually had.
But that's X-rated and would get me in trouble.

The overall point of my last two posts, was that the rich just get richer and the poor just get poorer. The whole "trickle down" thing to me, seems like just some BS excuse to justify the "tax breaks for the rich" or whatever other perks they're getting.

If they were genuinly creating jobs i can see the logic, but they aren't. All i've seen lately, is a guilded elite that work/milk/sell out a company for all the money they can make for few years, and then they move on to their next abomination.

I agree with you.
My last Factory job?
I got a Tie pin for 5 years Service.
They gave it to me while I was on the job.
I put it in one of my ear ring holes cause I had no where else to put it at the time.

I got wrote up for "Disrespecting the Company".
I quite shortly after.

No there wasn't. If you believe that, then prove it. Hard numbers and data, please.

Hard numbers for me means this.......
I employed up to 7 Guys and the lowest paid made $10.00 per hour.
(That's what I started a Guy out at)
The highest paid made $13.00 per hour
(After 1 year!)
Top pay would have been $20.00 per hour at 5 years.
At which point a New Crew would have been built and the pay scale would
have been based on running that crew.
The more you earn me?
The more you earn!
That's the American way.

As we all know Wall Street Wizards shot us all in the arse.
:nope:
So my Guys took the hit.
I took the hit.
There is no hard data, no proof, no evidence whatsoever that
"Trickle down" did anything but fool the masses.

If you believe anything other?
Your the type fool they were looking for.

So your construction company never had a wealthy customer?

Economics isn't just about the stuff that directly effects you, things effect you indirectly too

Many.
Includeing the U.S. Gov
Seems trickle down missed them also from what my books show.

Here is the problem with trickle down economics.....
Its designed to trickle...
The dam is held back by ludicrous regulation.

Here is the reality:

People want to make money. Doesn't matter if they are rich owners, or the "cogs in the machine". If success wasn't so penalized, there would be more incentive to reinvest. After all - its true that "you need money to make money".

The problem is that there is no balance. Some owners will maximize profits at the expense of workers. Liberals howl over this - and like it or not they have a point - it happens. On the other hand, Republicans yell about how government regulation keeps people from having a drive to succeed - and they are right too.

I say give if we can't get rid of the IRS, lets make it useful. Give tax incentives to any company that has a profit sharing plan. The percentage of profits that are distributed to the workers, the company gets an equal break on its taxes. Who will an owner decide to pay? His workers who make him money, or Uncle Sam? Easy choice for anyone who has to make payroll.

This does 2 things. It incentives the owner to "share the wealth" without it being an undue burden (since he is going to pay it one way or the other), as well as gives a direct incentive to the workers to perform. In the end the owner makes more because his people have an interest in doing a good job, the workers make more, and government has to get the heck outta the way. Win/Win/Win!!!

However, this has nothing to do with the OP. So, to that topic, I have no problem with extending unemployment benefits. What I have an issue with is how unemployment benefits are administered. Anyone claiming unemployment should have to pass a drug test regularly. They should have a closer check on whether or not they are actually and seriously putting forth effort in looking for a job.

Does unemployment benefits spur the economy? No. Such benefits are not spent on luxuries - they are spent paying thie rent and light bill. Anyone hear of a recovery because people paid their phone and cable bills? Of course not. However, those funds ARE critical to maintaining stability in an economy. Cut them off, and the economy WILL tank. However, there is no question that our legislators of both parties are pretty much all willing to extend benefits. The question is how are they going to be paid for. Democrats want to increase the debt, Republicans want to use unspent TARP monies.

Considering that TARP has to date been used as a corporate slush fund, I see no reason why the "for the working class" Dems are wanting to protect that corporate slush fund and instead put more debt on the backs of those they say they are looking out for......

Increasing the debt hurts the working class..... using TARP doesn't. So while I agree that this needs to be done, I would love to hear one of our more liberal members (except for tribesman - he is on my iggy list) explain how using corporate slush fund money is a bad thing and burdening the workers with more debt is a good thing.....

Yes, and your the one that posted your 15 years old?
What would you know about running a business?

OK, basic economic theory
Marx once said:"in a capitalist society, the upper class always seek to reinvest to increase profit"

I'm not an economist but i know history and political theory

Theory is that we'd all be employed or employable. Reality is the stronger suit. :yep:

Yup. One thing i learned really quick when i started working in the real world:

There's what a book says, or how a book says something should be done - and then theirs, how it's really done. The two are often, quite different.

A more relevant question might be ....has he noticed any difference in getting due payments from customers of different wealth levels?

The problem with Trickle Down Economics is that the middle class soon gets tired of being trickled on.

<rimshot> :D