3 ms·

I have no problem with improving the prospects of the poor in China/India. The issue is the savings in salary costs doesn't go to the consumer, it goes to the e

by JDDunn9 11y ago

I have no problem with improving the prospects of the poor in China/India. The issue is the savings in salary costs doesn't go to the consumer, it goes to the executives.

maratd 11y ago
> The issue is the savings in salary costs doesn't go to the consumer, it goes to the executives. This is a bit simplistic. Some of the savings do and some go to the consumer by way of competition among firms. Inflation has been pretty flat in recent years and that's not because governments stopped printing money. It's because prices on goods and services have been under a lot of pressure due to globalization. That means consumers are paying less than they would be if that weren't the case. Granted, those at the top are raking in the cash. But money is worthless unless you spend it and when they spend it, somebody has to do the work that the money is being spent on. That creates jobs. Certainly everybody wishes they were making more money and in some cases, the grievance is legitimate.
- JDDunn9 11y ago
  Trickle-down economics is a failed theory. The wealthy only spend a small percentage of their income. They re-invest most of it. True, sometimes they invest in businesses (VC, IPOs, Business expansion, etc.), but most investment dollars go to the secondary markets (Stocks, Derivatives, etc.), which does not create any jobs and produces no value.
- Mikeb85 11y ago
  > But money is worthless unless you spend it and when they spend it, somebody has to do the work that the money is being spent on. That creates jobs. The issue is that the rich spend a smaller proportion of their money than the middle class. So while globalisation does increase the prospects for some poor people, it definitely does take wealth out of the global economy and into the hands of the '1 percent'.
Shivetya 11y ago
that is so not true. the benefits of globalization and such benefit all. the cost in hours of work you to buy most common goods continue to go down. even many services have dropped in real hours cost for people because the equipment needed and supply chain over all has seen reduced cost. that trite line is great for politics but not for anyone who thinks for themselves
- JDDunn9 11y ago
  Research a little more about NAFTA and then get back to me.

by JDDunn9 11y ago

I have no problem with improving the prospects of the poor in China/India. The issue is the savings in salary costs doesn't go to the consumer, it goes to the executives.

maratd 11y ago

> The issue is the savings in salary costs doesn't go to the consumer, it goes to the executives. This is a bit simplistic. Some of the savings do and some go to the consumer by way of competition among firms. Inflation has been pretty flat in recent years and that's not because governments stopped printing money. It's because prices on goods and services have been under a lot of pressure due to globalization. That means consumers are paying less than they would be if that weren't the case. Granted, those at the top are raking in the cash. But money is worthless unless you spend it and when they spend it, somebody has to do the work that the money is being spent on. That creates jobs. Certainly everybody wishes they were making more money and in some cases, the grievance is legitimate.

JDDunn9 11y ago
Trickle-down economics is a failed theory. The wealthy only spend a small percentage of their income. They re-invest most of it. True, sometimes they invest in businesses (VC, IPOs, Business expansion, etc.), but most investment dollars go to the secondary markets (Stocks, Derivatives, etc.), which does not create any jobs and produces no value.
Mikeb85 11y ago
> But money is worthless unless you spend it and when they spend it, somebody has to do the work that the money is being spent on. That creates jobs. The issue is that the rich spend a smaller proportion of their money than the middle class. So while globalisation does increase the prospects for some poor people, it definitely does take wealth out of the global economy and into the hands of the '1 percent'.

Shivetya 11y ago

that is so not true. the benefits of globalization and such benefit all. the cost in hours of work you to buy most common goods continue to go down. even many services have dropped in real hours cost for people because the equipment needed and supply chain over all has seen reduced cost. that trite line is great for politics but not for anyone who thinks for themselves

JDDunn9 11y ago
Research a little more about NAFTA and then get back to me.