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

Please tell me you did not just quote Marx, ehhhh.

The economy turned around under Reagan in the 80's who was a big proponent of supply side aka trickle down, it worked, pretty well.The Dem controlled Congress did not mind too much then, but that was when the Dem party was still somewhat of a decent party and not the party of Barry O.

:up: Well said. Our Prime Minister John Key would employ you as Minster of Welfare in an instant!

Whenever I'm out of work I become this negative, lazy, sloth. Work is good for the well being and keeps me sane!