Thread 18154308

In hindsight, what went so wrong with trickle down theory?

>>18154308 (OP)
It's like tipping: if it's not enforced, if there are no consequences, and you're supposed to tip a substantial amount of your net take in, are you really going to do it?

>>18154308 (OP)
You chimpanzee wouldn't be writing bullshit with your iPhone 77 now if trickle down economics didn't work. Because you unproductive parasite wouldn't survive a week if you weren't sustained in care-free life by betters than you.

>>18154308 (OP)
He "forgot" that the banking cartel is constantly printing money and handing it out to the rich and well-connected

reagan never proposed a "trickle down theory", it is a meme created by leftists who want infinite taxes to pay for niggers and immigrants

>>18154308 (OP)
Simpler task. Name one thing that went right.

>>18154586
>reagan never proposed a "trickle down theory"
Not coined but his policies hinged on the idea.

>infinite taxes to pay for niggers and immigrants
You literally need taxes to do anything in a functioning state. Also most of the people on welfare and benefits are either old or white. It's been public knowledge for 40+ years at this point.

>>18154308 (OP)
People at the top tend hoard the wealth, they don't actually spend significant amounts of it.

>>18154550
The CEOs made a shitload of profit off of the iPhones by paying a lot in stocks and leveraging the future sales that would be produced by the workers to pay the workers in things they hoped would appreciate in value, they didn't trickled down their own wealth, they used their wealth to establish strawmen that exploited people who signed contracts to work for the strawman in hopes of future cash windfalls.

>>18154593
No you stupid nigger. They invent and produce staff which benefits you.

>>18154308 (OP)
The worst mistake was calling it trickle down because it triggers instant assmad with socies.
Does that graph show that the party who constantly bitches about taxing the rich also plan to tax everybody more in general?

>>18154601
Dude, Reagan was AGAINST corporational shenaginans. Don't pretend that the current bordello is some "trickle down reaganomics". It's good old Keynsian socialism. You DON'T fix it by increasing business taxes - which is all you morons want.

>>18154603
No, corpocuck, they raid public universities for new technology to privatize and leverage nonexistent future sales to create hype and pay engineers, then fire the engineers when the product actually succeeds.

>>18154603
>They invent
They don't. They pay research staff pennies to do that, that is if they don't suppress it.
>produce staff which benefits you.
A fuckton of their manufacturing is abroad (or they slap a Maed in X label) and they have directly advocated for the gutting/commodification of the education system pre-post uni/trade school and walling off research journals.

>>18154612
>You DON'T fix it by increasing business taxes - which is all you morons want.
Taxes aren't the issue. It's the fact that infrastructure and actual consistent delivery of services has been basically wrecked at this point. Having zero taxes mean jackshit if the roads are total ass or brownouts occur.

>>18154619
Just so happens that only the "tax the rich" folks like to seethe about some "trickle down". Reagan has explained to them that murdering business is not the way forward.
Increasing business competition (that is something exactly opposite of what these morons want) is. China has over 100 independent, private car producers. They develop because they DON'T wine about business owners and "the rich".

>>18154308 (OP)
Trickle down economics is literally correct. A better question is, why did we allow leftists to take over public discourse to go around saying it's false?
>out of 10 people there are 2 successful farmers who are successful and produced 100 beans this year, 5 who are average and produced 50 beans, and 3 lazy bums who dicked around and produced 0 beans
>leftists want us to take beans away from the successful farmers and give to the NEETs, every year we will continue to make 450 beans total per year (assuming the successful farmers dont leave for somewhere with better tax policies)
>if we dont take beans away from the successful farmers, they may be able to use them for experimentation and we may be able to produce new fertilizer or farming techniques from those experiments
>total bean production now explodes to the rich farmers producing 1,000 beans each and average farmers producing 250
The only thing that actually increases the aggregate economic value is new technology, and you kneecap innovation when you waste too much on gibs
>>18154592
>You literally need taxes to do anything in a functioning state
As a private individual who is not part of the state, I do not want the state to do any more than the bare minimum necessary.
>most of the people on welfare and benefits are either old or white
another episode of leftist leaving out per capita

>>18154625
>Reagan has explained to them that murdering business is not the way forward
Paying the taxes that everyone is supposed to pay up for isn't killing business.

>Increasing business competition (that is something exactly opposite of what these morons want) is.
Almost all those business interests want to cut down the competition, cuck regulation to suit their interests and basically rent-seek the American consumer to death.

>They develop because they DON'T wine about business owners and "the rich".
Do you just read shitty twitter news posts or something?

>>18154634
>As a private individual who is not part of the state
we got a Sovereign Citizen loser here

>>18154625
Yhea but they straight execute them over scandals too.
China is young in business like that. After 200 years even getting the government to not over regulate the industry so much that new companys cant start up against the old behemoths may not be enough.

>>18154613
>>18154613

Kek, as someone who has actually done medical research at a university, it's usually more
>professors patent research and spin off a startup
>hires postdocs and grad students
>startup either fails clinical trials or succeeds and people get to use the cool new invented thing (usually takes forever because of all the rounds of FDA trials)
I have never once heard of a corporation raiding a HYPSM-tier university

>>18154638
I'm not, but I'm also not a glowie or a clinton or a bush or a kennedy, so making the government super powerful doesnt benefit me. So are you a glowie, part of a wealthy political dynasty, or a bootlicker?

>>18154646
>As a private individual who is not part of the state
You can't just opt out of the state.

>>18154647
I am not one of the rulers/hereditary ruling class of the state nor part of the apparatus ruling it

>>18154603
Name the last 5 things the Rothschild family invented.

>>18154662
They sponsored thousands of inventions.

>>18154664
Name the last 5 things the Rothschild family invented anon.

>>18154665
These are the people who want to run the economy.

>>18154646
>I have never once heard of a corporation raiding a HYPSM-tier university
It literally happens iPhones, its why I brought it up.
https://www.aau.edu/university-research-made-your-smartphone-smart

>>18154308 (OP)
Nafta, the immigration act of 1990, free trade and the WTO
Reagan was pro free trade, but he wasn't actually the one who put all the shitty polices into effect. that would be bush 1 and clinton

>>18154666
>can't name even 5 things the Rothschild family has invented

>>18154666
No, they are the billionaires whose wealth should be trickling down through inventions as >>18154603 asserted instead of being hoarded by a family and used primarily to fortify their own social status.

>>18154592
>You literally need taxes to do anything in a functioning state.
nah
> Also most of the people on welfare and benefits are either old or white
they're disproportionately black, foreigners and roasties

>>18154671
I told you. They sponsor the research departments of ALL companies they own.

>>18154586
>economics isn't real stop talking about it oogabooga niggers and trannies!
>are you distracted yet?
This is why people don't take you seriously in real life.

>>18154675
So what are the last 5 things the Rothschild family invented?

>>18154675
>They sponsor the research
that you can't actually point out or name?

>>18154679
You are boring. And dense.

>>18154681
You can't answer a simple question that your entire ideology revolves around.

>>18154675
You mean they pay companies to steal public university research that they can privatize for profit?

>>18154680
I can't be arsed to check it for you. You would certainly be surprised but I'll leave it if as an exercise for you.

>>18154673
>they're disproportionately black, foreigners and roasties
Nope. Unfortunately the voter base that votes against having the bare minimum of social assistance and support also tend to be on it or will do so soon

>>18154689
>Rich people invent things so they deserve to be rich!
>What things?
>I don't know

>>18154689
So you asserted "facts" that you have never actually validated?

>>18154693
EVERY FUCKING THING THERE IS was invented (or funded) by business owners.
LED bulbs and 5 varieties of them. Happy?

>>18154689
>You would certainly be surprised
You definitely would be since you can't even name a single thing you are basing your entire argument around.

>>18154697
The Rothschild family invented LED lights?

>>18154697
No, they were largely invented or funded by public agencies like the DOD or public universities.

>>18154699
What a fucking idiot. What the difference it makes which exactly companies are owned by Rothschilds in particular.

>>18154704
You're genuinely seething that you can't list even 5 things the Rothschild family invented, aren't you?

>>18154702
And who builds DOD's equipment?

>>18154708
Public funds are used by the DOD to build and experiment.

>>18154706
I am seething at an idiot who doesn't have the slightest idea of how the modern economy works but imagines that he invented some gotcha kek.

>>18154704
You specifically said that rich people largely use their wealth to make inventions that benefit poor people and those are some of the richest people, but you can't name any inventions to credit them for.

>>18154711
>slightest idea of how the modern economy works
Aren't you the retard who tried to imply that the Rothchilds pay to build all the DOD equipment?

>>18154691
>Nope.
you're literally lying. black and illegals are significantly more likely to be on welfare than whites are.
>but illegals can't get welfare
pretty sure WIC straight up doesn't even discriminate and illegals can get welfare via their anchor baby kids. the only reason you get the
>whites are on welfare
meme is because whites are like 60% of the pop but like 40% of the welfare recipients where as blacks are like 13% of the pop but like 36% percent of welfare recipients
hell we just had a shutdown because the dems wanted more welfare gibs for illegals and "legal" migrants

>>18154713
Dude, you are retarded. I told you that everything around you was invented by private business.
inb4 - modern internet and computerization was conceived in private XEROX Parc. The short list of their inventions is: laser printing, Ethernet, the modern personal computer, graphical user interface (GUI) and desktop metaphor–paradigm, object-oriented programming, ubiquitous computing, electronic paper, amorphous silicon (a-Si) applications, the computer mouse, and very-large-scale integration (VLSI) for semiconductors

>>18154710
Wrong. DOD pays Corpos for everything.

>>18154724
Yes, which is the exact opposite of your claim that the corpos trickle down their wealth by paying the DOD for everything.

>>18154711
Your entire argument rests on the idea that rich people deserve to be rich because of all the things they invent but cannot name even 5 things the richest family on Earth invented which would justify their wealth. So, again, what are 5 things the Rothschild family invented?

>>18154726
Not that poster. Anyway who came up with trickle down as a term, was it a republican? What a retard if it was.

>>18154727
Again, you are stupid an I am not going to look for an answer for your stupid question.
What YOU have invented which entitles you to be so dense?

>>18154729
>can't name even 5 things the richest family on Earth invented

>>18154727
>>18154729
Calm down guys, this is 4chan, were all retards here.

>>18154308 (OP)
it worked out for the boomers

>>18154729
>You are stupid because I am completely unable to answer basic questions that would prove up my argument.
Whatever you need to tell yourself to no feel as stupid as you are.

>>18154550
the rich chimpanzee wouldn't be able to make the iPhone without government subsidies, government research and foreign chimpanzee labour

>>18154750
They would be much more efficient at that if socialists didn't grant them market monopolies under the guise of "regulating business".

4. 4 things invented by the Rothschild family? Anyone?

>>18154788
>Economic Warfare
>Financial Subterfuge
>Dark Money
>The Deep State
Bonus:
>Broken Window Economics

>>18154800
>buzzwords buzzwords buzzwords

>>18154812
They became buzzwords because the richest family on earth invented the processes in order to successfully infiltrate world governments so they could hoard their wealth instead of allowing it to trickle down.

>>18154800
>>18154818
What are some books on this?

>>18154820
The Ascent of Money
The House of Rothschild: Money's Prophets 1798-1848
Banksters and Warmongers
The Rothschilds: The Financial Rulers of Nations
Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy, and The Deep State
Or just read their wiki page to get started.

>>18154788
Well, privately invented AI to the rescue:
Patents associated with other Rothschild inventors
Jacob A. Rothschild: Co-invented several patents assigned to Honda Motor Co., Ltd. related to vehicle door mirrors and camera systems.
Peter Rothschild: Co-invented patents assigned to American Science and Engineering, Inc. related to X-ray inspection systems and radiation detection.
Richard A. Rothschild: Inventor of patents related to personalized preference optimization using biometric data, telemedicine, and providing advertisements based on user interaction.
Maxwell Bell Rothschild: Co-inventor of a "multipurpose storage device and method" assigned to MIEH, Inc..
Michael Rothschild: Inventor of patents related to computer processing, networking, and devices for assisting passengers to sleep.

>>18154838
So how much money trickled down to poor people from those inventions vs how much profit did they personally make on those inventions?

>>18154847
Don't move the goalpost you pathetic imbecile.
What YOU have invented which would entitle you to ANY wealth created by others.
It isn't about money but about goods and inventions you benefit from. That was the pint from the beginning but you morons only see the "mooneeey".

>>18154858
>Don't move the goalpost you pathetic imbecile.
How has a goalpost been moved? The thread topic is about trickle down economics and the goalpost moving argument was that inventions allow wealth to trickled down from families like Rothchilds to the average poor person, so how much wealth have those inventions generated for people who aren't Rothschilds in trickle down theory instead of just being mechanisms that allow them to hoard and fortify their own personal fortunes?

>>18154876
Kek idiot. Your quality of life has improved because of other people's inventions. You can NEET and ask kindergarten level questions (mixed with tricky ones which are _obviously_ impossible to answer like a typical leftard crook) instead of working in the fields and standing for hours in breadlines - like in centrally planned, government run economies.

>>18154838
And these were all members of the banking family Rothschild, not random guys with the surname Rothschild, yes?

>>18154888
yes

>>18154308 (OP)
TVs
Fridges
Cars
Smartphones
Electricity
Computers
Lightbulbs
etc..

>New things start expensive in small units
>Mass production happens
>They become dirt cheap and available everywhere

On regulation side.

>China
>very low regulation
>explosive capital society
>tons of competition
>mass production
>all things become dirt cheap
>costs become close to raw material
>high job rate
>high income mobility
>highest amount of middle class in the world

>>18154890
Except, no.

>>18154905
Yes.

>>18154885
>Your quality of life has improved because of other people's inventions
But rich people aren't the ones inventing most things and even the ones you cited they were all just co-inventors and didn't actually get the full credit since all they contributed was money that was offset by government subsidies and enabled by publicly funded research.

There haven't been breadlines since the 1980s when the governments were collapsing because of foreign interference. Meanwhile just last year there were egglines in america because of inflation and lack of supply and hardly anyone can afford proper healthcare.

>>18154659
Nope but youre being ruled by those two groups so you are a part of the state

>>18154721
There are more white people in America than black people so there are more white people on welfare than black people, purely numbers.

>>18154909
Your Jacob A Rothschild is some guy from California...

>>18154812
>i dont like these words so theyre buzzwords
Intelligence frightens the shill

>>18154901
>China very low regulation

Yeah, they frequently keep their laborers in a barracks on the jobsite and don't allow them to leave. Have you heard about Foxconn? They have permanent suicide nets around the building because so many of their slave laborers kill themselves.

Foxconn makes electronic components that are in most phones and most video game consoles. Without Foxconn a good portion of our electrical devices would cease to exist. Well, they're constantly leaving messages in the boxes of their products and hidden in the devices they make, they usually say "please help us".

You really think that's a good labor model for our country. I'll spoil your fantasies for you, if this came to pass, you wouldn't be the one holding the whip.

>>18154308 (OP)
Nothing, it's just that its actual goals are different from the claimed goals.

>>18154941
>no evidence
>just buzzwords
>calls anyone who disagrees a shill
Ok, a shill for what?

>>18154933
You seem to be jealous about money. In a market economy, money is just the equivalence of services provided for the consumers. It's a measure of one's contribution. If you contribute "a lot" (you create a lot of jobs for example - Rotschilds probably employ millions of workers; although fuck you if you want me to check this) then you get "a lot" of money in return. Leftists whining about money are missing this point. People who actually run the economy _already_ contribute by doing this; if you'd take money from them you would de facto force them to contribute without compensation.
Now, in the real world there are countless ways to abuse this mechanism and "earn" money without contributing much; or at all. Focus on fixing this, but NOT on screaming about "wealth" and "wealthy" in general. They could only be replaced by bureaucrats which are infinitely worse at this task; if only because their personally risk nothing for failing.

>>18154953
>You seem to be jealous about money
No I seem to be trying to see if wealth actually trickles down like trickled down economics predicts and you are just butthurt you can't prove such a thing actually occurs since the top 1% tends to hoard far more wealth than they give to poor people.

>It's a measure of one's contribution
Yes which is why you have no way to actually measure your intuited claims since rich people don't actually trickle the money they are given down the line as trickle down economics predicts.

>you would de facto force them to contribute without compensation.
That is the point of trickle down, that the top earners use their wealth to enrich others instead of just leveraging it for their own future compensation.

>Now, in the real world there are countless ways to abuse this mechanism and "earn" money without contributing much
And we know this for an absolute fact because rich people tend to exploit those countless abuses instead of enriching poor people down line like with every pyramid scheme and ponzi scheme ever.

>>18154944
Moving billion people out of poverty is the benefit.
Similarly, the same model happened in the west early on during industrial revolution. Hundreds of millions were lifted out of eternal poverty. The cost of doing work is always there, you either dont do any work and die a slow death (decadent death) or do plenty of work, reap plenty of rewards for your future and future generation.

>>18154969
Moron.
Wealth isn't money.
Wealth trickles down.

>>18154975
Sure, the reason a large portion of the population can't even afford proper health insurance or to take vacations is because so much wealth has trickled down to them that they don't even have time to be healthy or happy.

>>18154308 (OP)
>what went wrong
the theory that the "rich" would share the wealth was always a retarded fantasy.

The whole point of high taxes (95% tax) on income earned over a million per year was to make it pointless to earn more than that, which does cause the wealth to get spread around.

>>18154982
It's because of government monopolizing business and turning the current economic system into an abomination resembling the medieval guilds.
Make no mistake, the current economic system is absolutely abhorrent. BUT - YOUR proposed solution would only make it worse as you are barking up the entirely wrong tree. In fact you are SUPPORTING all current abnormalities with you actions.

>>18154982
and - what this has to do with some boomer who was running USA for a while 40 years ago?

>>18154308 (OP)
Ronald reagan is in hell waiting for heaven to trickle down

>>18154991
>It's because of government monopolizing business
They allow the monopolies because rich people like the Rothchilds pay lobbyists to enforce their monopolies so they don't have to trickle down their wealth, the government doesn't actually own any of the health insurance companies, it just gives them subsidies and customers.

>YOUR proposed solution
I didn't propose any solutions, can you link to the post ITT that proposed any solutions? I just asked you to prove that wealth trickles down in the current economic system as you keep trying to defend, but you keep trying to change the subject instead of proving your own claims.

>>18154997
They put the laws into place that resulted in those poor outcomes as well as other rules like making education loans nondischargeable while making also education certificates mandatory for basic entry level positions.

>>18155071
Is that when? Yhea that older Gen man. High school was enough to do quite a bit in those times. Lots of older people think college is the shit though. They think every kid needs college.
We have tech that connects us all and allows everyone around the world to see the same things. How much would that impact this phenomena? Compared to before when reading was primary.

>>18155088
No, the problem was the generation before mandated high school, so instead of being useful education, it had to pander to the lowest common denominator and college became the new high school and the private sector began mandating the opt in education for basic employment.

>>18155089
Most people should be starting thier careers at around 16-18 this really has been a travesty.

>>18155089
Oh btw, his is why college should have quotas, not of race but of total enrollees. They're not burger joints.

>>18154308 (OP)
It assumes there is a free market where rich people compete to offer the best prices to the rest of society, and it assumes the rich don't want to simply accumulate a greater share of the overall economy than the rest of society.

If you give them more breaks as a class, they use it to advance their position as a class.

Trickle up does make sense though. Giving more breaks to poorer people and relying on them to use their money to buy from the cheaper, better, and more efficient rich people would work to help out everyone. It's a concept that bolsters the free market, rather than a concept that relies on people believing it already exists in some kind of perfect form.

>>18154550
If trickle down worked, people would be more likely to own their own homes, to pay for their own college or thier kids college, to start and maintain small businesses, and a million other indicators of real success, not just more likely to pay for their own surveillance device.

>>18154537
Those of us who belong to be here will.

>>18154592
>You literally need taxes to do anything in a functioning state.
If you’ve ever seen the state of Illinois, they take and take and take taxes in literally every conceivable way. They legalize everything and take huge revenues tax money. NONE of that benefits any citizens of the state. Not even the niggers or browns are getting benefits from it because it all gets embezzled like an open secret or wasted. It’s an absolute meme. You don’t need infinite taxes or tax growth for the government to function. In fact, it’s shown that government caps and meddling makes shit worse for the average person. Look at the housing crisis in Minneapolis exacerbated by taxes and caps on rent whereas Saint Paul has done much better by encouraging building with business-friendly policies.
>Also most of the people on welfare and benefits are either old or white.
Yet another person who doesn’t understand what per capita means. By any chance, is there chirping in your hallway?

>>18155155
Socialists also don't understand anything about anything

>>18155055
Obsessed

>>18155055
Epic leftist meme, my fellow redditor

>>18154612
>Dude, Reagan was AGAINST corporational shenaginans.
Did he do anything to stop them? Otherwise it's just hypocrisy.

>>18154550
I’d rather a house than an iphone 77

>>18155188
You can't really do shit against entrenched monopolies and trade union (like construction workers unions >>18155191) privileges.
Reagan administration was in charge way too short and only delayed the descent really. It would have been EVEN WORSE by now without him. He got elected because of running stagflation crisis in the first place.

>>18154308 (OP)
>Corporatism
Gay mutt communism

>>18154677
>t. NTA
Every platonist, hegelian and dialectroon a straightjacket
>Marginal utility

>>18154939
and blacks make up more welfare recipients per capita

>>18154677
The reason people don't take you seriously is because you're wearing a dress.

>>18154308 (OP)
Not forcing the rich to spend the same percentage of their income on groceries as the poor, basically.

>>18154971
The movement wasn't out of the benevolence of the rich, it was from dragging them kicking and screaming into laws and regulations that forbid them using those hundreds of millions as disposable labor. Which is what we're doing now. If it was up to them we'd still be in the dogshit circumstances of the past - just look at the kind of miserable labor conditions of an amazon warehouse employee.

>>18155280
>The movement wasn't out of the benevolence of the rich
Whooaaah - we have a Marxist "economist" among us!!!
It was due to competition between business owners. Sheckelstein pays you more so you won't work for Goldengrabber.

>>18155280
>miserable labor conditions of an amazon warehouse employee
These poor exploited people making over $20 an hour plus benefits...

>>18154901
>costs become close to raw material
Cost for furniture and clothes is already at raw material levels for consumers.

>>18155280
Moving billions out of poverty in China happened after Deng abandoned Maoist communism and transitioned towards capitalist-private property ownership/management of industries. In the west, the transition of eternal poverty to successful industry happened when we dropped the old feudalism and started moving business towards capitalism where private people build companies, manage companies, and products that benefit everyone where the economy is done in voluntary participation where everyone benefits from one another. There's no "eat da rich" nigger mentality in the process that made America or China rich and prosperous. Its mutual voluntary self interest with voluntary trade.

>>18155198
>You can't really do shit against entrenched monopolies and trade union (like construction workers unions >>18155191 #) privileges.
What happened to Standard Oil? Also trade unions were never the issue in America. He's just a hypocrite like Eisenhower who built up the military industrial complex and before leaving office said "you should really do something about that military industrial complex."

>>18154308 (OP)
>what went wrong
There's nothing that went "wrong", it's just what capitalism naturally is without regulations and taxes. Reagan adopted it because the post-war keynesian boom had showed its limit (declining profit rate made investments concentrated in big firms, which in turn were conservative in their investment, which in turn caused productivity and inflation to rise + oil shock). This made the rich invest more which caused a productivity increase alongside more wealth to be created, but it also assumed wealthy people spent their wealth and actually invested it in the country. Irl, they concentrated it and squeezed as much profit as they could.

>>18154634
>muh leftists want everyone to be equal!!!! >: (
I would actually argue back by saying that protection rights, free education, access to healthcare etc actually satisfies the requirements for great individuals to pop up, but you're so entrenched in your meme libertarian ideology that you won't be able to properly adress anything I say.

>>18154723
>modern internet
lmfao as someone who actually studied CS this is hilariously wrong to say. You have no idea of how much the internet and CS was started and is still dominated by FOSS aswell as universities.

>>18155331
>Moving billions out of poverty in China happened after Deng
The reason why Deng's transition didn't result in mass poverty like in Russia was precisely because he was careful to do things gradually with a state control and gave property rights to workers through specific mechanisms. It was much more equivalent to the USSR transitioning into Yugoslavia than whatever you seem to believe.

>towards capitalist-private property ownership/management of industries
lmfao, I can understand that people don't consider China socialist, but this is a bit stretched don't you think ?

>Its mutual voluntary self interest with voluntary trade.
Meme buzzwords. Most transactions for the bottom 50% are very far from "self interest voluntary"

>>18155291
tryna explain economics to leftists is like trying to explain it to a goldfish. understand that Marxism is not an economic theory and economists never took it seriously, it's an estaology and its proponents have always been trust fund kid humanities students

>>18154985
>The whole point of high taxes (95% tax) on income earned over a million per year was to make it pointless to earn more than that
?

>>18154308 (OP)
Right wingers love Capitalism but they have literally no actual fucking clue what Capitalism is or how it functions on a structural level.
That is simply the reality. Without an understanding of how money is power and how economic class works, you literally cannot create a functional system in the long term.
This is why Econfaggots still argue for more Neoliberalism when its obvious the result is just more oligarchic power, because they literally cannot envision Capitalism beyond numbers on a sheet rather than a social order.

>>18154971
lmao what? Feudalism literally lowered average heights and life expectancy until the Social Democratic Revolution until the late 19th/early 20th century. The average brit lost 6cm's over the industrial revolution. Areas where British enforced colonial control still haven't regained their pre-industrial heights to this day.

>>18154971
lmao what? Early Capitalism literally lowered average heights and life expectancy until the Social Democratic Revolution in the late 19th/early 20th century. The average brit lost 6cm's over the industrial revolution. Areas where Europeans enforced colonial control still haven't regained their pre-industrial heights to this day.

>>18155418
that's funny you should say that because overall QoL, health, nutrition standards in Eastern Europe significantly dropped during half century of gommunism

>>18154750
The greatest period of industrial development in the US was the second half of the 19th century when there was only a very tiny government and you could do nearly anything you wanted. Few taxes, no zoning laws, no regulations etc.

>>18154308 (OP)
I wonder when leftists will ever realize Reagan's tax cuts were a bitpartisan effort Congressional Democrats signed onto?

trusting libertarians, for instance.

say's law has been disproven since the 30s but they still cling to it as much as baptists cling to flat earth

>>18155409
Everyone loves capitalism, even the communists thats why they want everything capitalists have created, built, and maintained to build the society they live in.

Even Marx knew this. Capitalism is the way towards the ideals of communism. There's no removal of capitalism and then communism becomes a magical thing, there's no mechanism for communism that leads to success.

It didn't account for the fact that wealth accumulation is basically a hoarder tier mental illness and those types will never give it up willingly.

>>18155291
Marx lived before electricity, indoor plumbing, or the automobile, when the fastest mode of transportation was a steam ship. He can't offer you any answers for 21st century problems. He couldn't even predict the early 20th century.

>>18154670
>Reagan was pro free trade, but he wasn't actually the one who put all the shitty polices into effect
Didn't he give into the carping of electronics companies to raise tariffs on Japanese imports or something?

>>18154308 (OP)
Nothing

>>18154308 (OP)
Things were a heck of a lot better when he left office than when he entered it.

if Bill Gates never existed you would still be a poor loser in your mom's basement because his wealth has nothing to do with why your life is shit, the reason it's shit, is you.

>>18155506
you just refuted reagan's rationale behind tax cuts.

>>18155506
^This. Leftist think if somehow all rich people were killed and they took their stuff then they would move out of their mom's basement and finally get laid.

>>18155493
idk. I just know he liked a lot of the gay shit like nafta, free trade and gun control, but most of the gay polices he was a fan of didn't get implemented until 1989/the 1990s

>>18155272
The reason people (correctly) assume you're gay is because you think about trannies every waking moment.

>>18155401
Everybody gangsta until you remind them that under capitalism, people don't need to breath.

>>18155506
They believe in Zero-Sum economy. They think our economy today is the same as it was 10,000 years ago and human economy is always someone stealing from another

>>18155401
economists use marxist terms and theory all the time

>>18155711
lolberts are illiterate, so their only reference point for 'economist' is a tiktok influencer or a twitter rug pull bot.

>>18154308 (OP)
it went wrong due to the fact that globalism has destroyed middle class jobs which produce products normal people buy en masse to keep the economy going

the only people that are better off under globalism are the top 5%, who have made insane profits from it
in order for trickle down to work, this 5% would need to make up the deficit/gap in spending the destroyed middle class is no longer able to, they can only buy so many Ferraris, Rolexs and yachts, it's not enough spending. Instead, this 5% leverages their wealth to extract even more money from the underclass by buying up real estate creating speculative bubbles making things even worse.

>>18155300
It's fucking insane. I can have stuff manufactured to completion for WAY cheaper than the cost of raw materials here. It's absolutely insane, people have no clue how bad things are. Something that costs $1000 dollars to be made in China would cost me $50-$65k. People have some inkling that manufacturing things is cheaper overseas, their minds would be scrambled when they learn just how insanely fucked the West's economy has become.

>trickle down theory
Reagan never once referred to his policies as "trickle down".

>>18155677
Isn't politics zero sum though
Reality in general should be zero sum

>>18155462
Leftists oppose Democrats as much as they oppose Republicans. I wonder when retards like you finally understand this.

>>18155393
Inter monopoly conflict
Monopolists backed by state wanted their cartel on standard oil's position.
The monopoly itself was waining because natural monopolies can't into violence

>>18155462
They could have even remembered that he got the idea for tax cuts from JFK.

>>18155677
>>18155506
Bill Gates spent a ton of resources bruteforcing his monopoly, lobbying the government and fucking over the competition.

>>18156169
Maybe the gov shouldnt be doing those things?

Why do rightists stubbornly insist that capitalism with a rainbow flag on it for token diversity points is "left wing"?

>>18154755
wtf do you think socialism is you?
I imagine you are so retarded your basement is covered in sticky notes reminding you to breath you dumb fuck.

>>18154830
meds please.

>>18154791
Not as early as that, but Jews did undermine the Byzantine empire in order to help Islam, and Jewish and Ottoman support for Islam was a way to hinder domestic institutions in the conquered territories. This means there was a long gap between the unstable period where Islam was formed and ottomans institutionalizing it, but the religion is ready made for that purpose because it demands compliance and outlaws most commerce not controlled by the religion.
Outright state department psyops to control the third world started in native American times and advanced to wahabbism, drug trade and only more recently the environmental movement and conservation.

>>18155167
taxes arent socialist.

>>18154673
The only people that should be getting benefits are the old and disabled. Women should just learn to practice abstinence and stop letting low IQ retards come in them.

>>18156199
Because liberalism and leftism share the same root. They're not all that different if you think about it.

>>18156296
What type of ahithole do you want to live in?

>>18156378
What kind of question is that?

>>18156284
Niall Ferguson is a respected historian and academic. Cope.

ITT: LBJfag samefags for hours

>>18155786
who is Bohm-Bawerk, Hayek, Friedman, Menger?

>>18156281
Socialists have always been about "regulating wild capitalism".
Leftard idiot.

>>18157099
you imaging people like reagan who demolished the protections against monopiles is somehow a socialist is what makes you retarded. I understand as a retard it is too much for you to understand. But you arent special you dont have secret knowledge the normies dont, and you should read a book published by someone who isnt on every academic blacklist.

>>18156389
And guess what Niall Ferguson doesnt support your view. That the Rothschilds are relevant today or ever ruled the world.

Because richfags are conservative with their money, they spend less as a percentage of their income, tend to stash the wealth in tax havens and real estates instead of investing in productive things.
Rich fags also aren't the main driver of consumption and demands.
You want the money to concentrate in the middle class and the lower classes because they're backbone of the economy and their demands is what powers it. The more disposable income they have the better. It's ultimately the working people who wants to buy a house and settle down that make the most money for the real estate people, people that already have wealth aren't going to purchase a new home every year
Plus, poor people spend way more so their money actually circulate, often back into the hands of rich fags anyway

The problem is that the left uses a different definition of justice than the right. Justice is equal results for leftists. Everybody should end up with more or less the same material goods - or finish the race at the same time.
For the economic right justice is about equal rules of the game for everybody - or, you get what you (really) deserve. If you slack (or you lack skill, or you simply have bad luck) you end up last, and this is just.
We may talk around each other for eternity just because we have different end goals of our desired systems. We should really divide ourselves between different countries as there is no common ground and any "compromise" solutions don't satisfy anybody.

>>18154586
>leftists who want infinite taxes to pay for niggers and immigrants

True, but the answer isn't infinite profits for Wall Street 1%ers.

>>18156199
Because the "right wingers" on this site are demoralized retards who have reduced politics to sex and race. They purity spiralled hard.

>>18157237
Their profits aren't infinite, your picture is a cheap propaganda (and fake) and the Wall Street at least creates orders of magnitude more value than all leftists combined. It is just that they earn more than you.

>>18156199
>>18157249
Any country where it's government spends more than 20% of its GDP is economically left wing, there is no reason it needs to do this, outside of world war of course. The US was certainly socially left wing after the 1960s, it was unheard of in history for a society to reject the institution where most people are married and raising a family in their early 20s and encourage racemixing and homosexuality.

>but reagan was right wing by my 2025 overton window shifted standards
>everyone agrees with me
And you are all wrong? I would concede perhaps Reagan secretly yearned for a return to the America he once knew, but in terms of his policies he never challenged the new deal or the 1960s counterculture since the majority of Americans were now boomers and the silent generation that presided over this social change. Reagan could only curb the excess if he intended to get elected.

Reagan represented a critical moment in US history where the effects of the social change became apparent. If there was an economic depression and boomers could not white flight to the suburbs and had to live in the ghetto they would do a 180 real quick. Indeed this was a fear among you leftists back then. However, ironically, Reagan's economic policies worked and boomers became happy yuppies investing in real estate, it is why they now own half the country.

>>18155393
>What happened to Standard Oil?
They just took on a bunch of different names (Like Mobil, Chevron, Amoco, Texaco, Exxon, BP, Pennzoil, etc) by using a bunch of (pun intended) Shell companies that were still heavily tied together conglomerations with shared trusts and boards that served as a polyopoly hydra. You think its just a coincidence that every station in town always has the exact same prices save a penny or two?

>>18154308 (OP)
It doesn't exist. There is no such thing as "trickle down theory," it was a term invented by Shitlibs to describe "not punitively taxing businesses."

>>18155404
Yes. Having a 99% tax on annual income over a million causes the wealth to be spread around because everyone would rather pay the money out as wages to their employees than give anything to the government as taxes. The government doesn't get much tax revenue from such taxes because it just changes how people pay out revenue to avoid the taxes.

>>18156378
>>18156386
>no, it's bad if you don't give useless losers and foreigners welfare, reee

When a leftist says "the rich" he doesn't actually mean Bill Gates, he means "middle class white people" and that their property should be expropriated and redistributed to DeShaun and Khalid.