3 ms·
"but it's much better for the economy that they spend it," Generally it isn't - because that tilts the economy towards producing goods and services that are wa
by neilwilson 9y ago
"but it's much better for the economy that they spend it,"
Generally it isn't - because that tilts the economy towards producing goods and services that are wanted rather than those that are needed. Trickle down has been shown over the last 30 years to be largely a myth.
For example if you have public healthcare and private healthcare and there is a shortage of doctors then the wealthy "crowds out" the public healthcare system by purchasing private healthcare. Essentially they are using their wealth to jump the queue. Like the 'priority queue' at a theme park.
- dandermotj 9y agoConsumption through spending is economically beneficial to everyone. You misunderstand what 'trickle down economics' is.
- Boothroid 9y agoSo then let's have permanent war because all that spending on bombs is economically beneficial to everyone, right?
- dandermotj 9y agoSay hello to the military-industrial complex
- dnautics 9y agoWe just have to have some aliens threaten to invade our planet to goose the economy. It'll be great for everyone!
- pbhjpbhj 9y agoAnd pushing people to ever more overuse of resources can't go wrong because we have an infinite supply of all resources, it can't fail. /s
- dnautics 9y ago>Consumption through spending is economically beneficial to everyone. What about the externalities of destruction of the environment due to consumption?
- chii 9y agoOnly if gov't didn't apply environmental regulations when they should've.
- snarf21 9y agoI think there were talking more about the velocity of money than trickle down. If money is in the market and it sits, there is no taxation on it (yet). If they buy a car, that money pays people and parts and taxes are paid. They spend what is left to other people who also pay taxes, etc. So money can be taxed multiple times as it powers the economy instead of sitting in an asset that is deferred.
- neilwilson 9y agoThe paradox of thrift is solved by the source of liquidity. Let them count their coins if they feel like it.
- wolfgke 9y ago> because that tilts the economy towards producing goods and services that are wanted rather than those that are needed Who has the authority to define what is needed?
- neilwilson 9y agoGenerally those that are elected to do so. Assuming you're in favour of a modern democracy, rather than a technocracy, an epistocracy, or the wild west.
- wolfgke 9y ago> Generally those that are elected to do so. > Assuming you're in favour of a modern democracy, rather than a technocracy, an epistocracy, or the wild west. This argumentation is pettifoggery.