Does "trickle down" econimics ever work?

Does "trickle down" econimics ever work?

Does your father?

Yes he does.

...

Too obvious. Saged and reported. Would love to talk to you in person. I want to know what drives people like you.

Hidden, reported, saged, called the cops

It certainly doesn't when corporations are allowed to export jobs to third world countries and hide profits in tax havens like Ireland.

Do you?

Yes it does, except its "trickle up".

All economic activity that looks to lower costs of production and increase value of sales will inevitably lead to stripping of wealth from the consumer and labourer and transfer it to the capital owner. That has been the cycle of economy since the dawn of time and the only way to offest a collapse where the poor have no more wealth to continue purchasing goods and paying taxes has been economic expansion that creates new jobs, new markets and new resources.

"conservative" economics never worked more than Marxist one and at the end of the day, you must disregard social justice and notions of equality or fairness if you want to conduct business and acquire wealth. Trade is inherently unequal the bigger you get.

When taxes are low and there's no subsidies (corporate welfare), yes it does.

Yes, so long as it's combined with economic protectionism and telling immigrants to fuck off.

You're wrong about that, as prosperity in a country increases the companies can afford to hire more hands to expand - the limiting factor becomes the number of hands available. Ideally you'll have a labour shortage and wages skyrocket, which has never crashed an economy. This is the situation in which trickle-down is working and the standard of life for the nation is increasing. Unfortunately it does cause kikes to pressure governments to let niggers in, thus wrecking wages and plunging the people into poverty.

if you are a filthy commie, consider this:
we all already live on surplus value of tesla, guy who cured polio, etc
literally all of classical music can be summed up by 5 composers, out of which mozzart makes up one half
whole of classical physics can be summed up by just one guy, newton
whole of philosophy can also be summed up by 5 people, with plato and aristotel basically being half of all philosophy
and so on

people arent all equal, deal with it

Of course not. Wealth trickles UP and always has. That's why there are rich people. No single human has any hope of actually producing millions of dollars worth of value in their lives through their own labor alone. The deal the wealthy have with their workers may be beneficial to the workers but it's not a guarantee and straight up kikery is on the rise.

The limiting factor always has been the demand, and in closed-loop system, demand can only expand as far as the available resources of your consumers who are your workforce at the same time. The only way to increase profit in this scenario is either foreign export, outsourcing, lowering of the costs or price increase. Only one of those scenarios adds to a wider national growth, whereas all others lead to exploitation of already set and finite domestic market, unless you discover new resources or create a new market (with new products and new demands within that market).

Labour shortage will have an inflationary effect on earnings in long term and negate any wealth increases as the situation will return to equilibrium after a downturn. "Trickle down" never had major impact on wealth transfers from rich to poor, nor did it create new sources of wealth for the masses - the only effect has been the management of employment via capital investments that at the end of the day still belong to the few.
All wealth transfers ultimately lead to wealth accumulation where that wealth has the most staying and investment power, which is what gives us the 1%.
The only way to break out is to start working for yourself and become one of the capital holders.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that there isn't any economic law that means wealth will trickle down to the working class, companies SHOULD be held to account for their social and environmental impact but naturally such ideas are co opted and corrupted by basically the same kikes that are doing the harm

I don't believe you. Yes when you reach the limits of the market companies have to get hardcore to increase profits, but competition should keep it in check if you have a true free market.

If you have a company already functioning as efficiently as possible according to the current constraints on labour and competition, it may well be that increasing profits further is not possible. I submit that this isn't a problem, you don't need an exponentially growing economy if your goal is the well-being of the people.

"trickle down" is just the transformation of a free market economy into a command economy user.
It's a Trotskyist switcharoo at it's core since all the kikes at the top are the brain behind the marxism.

sage for redpill me on x
sage for low effort OP that somehow managed to go around the char rule.

It's okay to be mad

Except when your initial investment is based on borrowed money and you are fighting to pay off interest that every dollar is burdened with from its inception.

The system is rigged from the very start and you might well not believe me, but the economy we have is not a free market, its a corporatist oligopoly of various levels, overlaid with a dominance of banking extracting wealth through compound interest on every transaction that has its origin in a bank loan. The ideal model of a free market never existed beyond start conditions some 200 years ago, when Bank of England got hardcore and when industrialization kicked off, creating wealth that was no longer based on land property.

We had this little idea, called "the third way" in the middle of 20th century. The man who proposed it is in your right bottom corner with his hand outstretched.

Oh, no I fully agree with you on all that, I thought it didn't need to be said that the kikes have to go into the oven and their usurious banking practices be abolished. What I was saying in was assuming that a country is behaving rationally regarding the banking sector, I am quite aware we don't have a free market right now.

Given tat "trickle down" is inevitably tied up with the current economic order, there is no way that this idea is anything more than a smokescreen for Reaganite nonsense we have been mired in since the 80s.

www youtube com/watch?v=rbFOyTr0ajQ

...

Economic freedom is equality of opportunity + private property ownership. Opportunities can be created by the rich, the fortunate or the ambitious, not "wealth" cannot. Opportunity is a concept, money is a finite resource.

"Wealth" does not trickle down. The working class must earn wealth through labor.

How am I doing?

nope

Your intelligence is a finite resource too.