3 ms·
to take your statement a step further than just retail, I'll say that the entire economy is effectively largely dependent on people spending money. Which is why
by gr3yh47 9y ago
to take your statement a step further than just retail, I'll say that the entire economy is effectively largely dependent on people spending money. Which is why trickle-down economics has been not working at all for at least a few decades and yet somehow this is still the resoning for tax plans.
the idea being that the 1% who has 90% of the country's wealth needs a little more to create jobs (from thin air)
whereas the truth is that people spending money is what will create jobs
it's such a shame
- ashark 9y ago"Trickle down" has never made any sense to me. Maybe it's different at big companies, but at small ones 100% of the hiring I've observed goes something like this: "uh oh, we have[1] more business coming in than we can handle, better hire!". Never, ever "welp, we have extra cash, better hire for... uh, some reason". Extra money without an actual need to hire more workers might go into marketing or sales, but only to a (lowish) point. [1] Usually "we have", but sometimes "we anticipate".
- wmeredith 9y agoIt makes more sense if you're one of the oligarchs. I mean, not the logic of the argument, but the reasons for supporting it ;)