Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

The Lady's not returningFollow

#52 Apr 12 2013 at 2:45 AM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
Gbaji wrote:
Because (at least in a reasonably "free" economy), the same things which result in greater wealth for "the rich" also result in greater improvements to the lives of all those within the same economy (statistically speaking at least). Put in the most direct and simple way: If the guy who owns the TV store is getting richer, it's because he's selling more TVs. Which means that people are buying more TVs. Which means that the people both have more TVs *and* the money to buy them in the first place. Which means that their quality of life (in at least a couple different metrics, and assuming that owning a TV versus not owning one is "good") are better. Not *because* the rich man got richer, but as a side consequence of the same factors that make him richer.
This is correct, yes. But it doesn't happen because the rich man gets wealthier, it happens because the poor people get wealthier and can afford to buy more TV's, so trickle up rather than trickle down. Because if the TV salesman is selling 100 TV's a year and he gets a tax cut he'll just have more money and that's that, if he's selling 100 TV's a year and his customers get a tax cut there will be more people who can afford a TV so his sales are likely to go up which means he's getting more money and possibly hiring more employees to handle the increased amount of customers. So both situations make Mr TV salesman richer, only one of them is beneficial to the poor people buying his TV's.

The whole theory of give the rich tax cuts and they'll invest more leans on the belief that creating the room for more supply will increase supply and demand. It's so obviously wrong you could explain it to a 5 year old.

Edited, Apr 12th 2013 3:52pm by Aethien
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#53 Apr 12 2013 at 6:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,576 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
The whole theory of give the rich tax cuts and they'll invest more leans the belief that creating the room for more supply will increase supply and demand. It's so obviously wrong you could explain it to a 5 year old.


Which would explain why Gbaji is out of his depths, intellectually.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#54 Apr 12 2013 at 7:01 AM Rating: Good
******
43,873 posts
Debalic wrote:
Meh, debt's not an issue We'll our children will pay it off when we're dead.
I'm hoping mine pays my debt well before I'm dead.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#55 Apr 12 2013 at 7:02 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,426 posts

Because (at least in a reasonably "free" economy), the same things which result in greater wealth for "the rich" also result in greater improvements to the lives of all those within the same economy


Carried interest exemption? Oh wait, that only helps a small segment of the very wealthy.
Oh! Moving jobs to lower cost labor markets? Oh wait...
Could you give us a hint? You're sure these "improvements" exist because of increased wealth stratification, because honestly that's close to the stupidest thing you've posted. Well, I mean not the birther stuff. Or when you didn't know the EEOC existed. Or, never mind, it's not that stupid I guess, relatively.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#56 Apr 13 2013 at 5:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,492 posts
I used to wish her dead, but I must have mellowed, as I can't find any joy in the death of a geriatric woman suffering from advanced dementia. I do, however, retain an anger at her promotion of selfishness, dressed up as "housewife common sense", that tainted a generation and drove class divisions to depths we hadn't seen since the 1st world war.

The economic boom of the early '80s was merely the logical progression of Tony Benn's smart exploitation of North Sea Oil (sorry Scotland), and a generally upbeat western economic climate. What she did achieve was to confine the fiscal benefits to the haves at the expense of the have-nots.

Things I can never forgive her:

  • Section 28 was a hateful piece of legislation, and has justly been compared with similar clauses in South Africa's apartheid regime, albeit focused on sexuality rather than race.
  • Her belligerent, macho stance on republican terrorism. Throughout her tenure she refused to hold negotiations with anyone associated with republican violence. Another classic, arrogant, misguided principled-but-counter-productive policy. Some of her officials did have covert talks with SF/IRA, but this was against Thatcher's wishes (not blessed by her, as recent revisionists claim). Within a couple of years of her departure, her successor embraced the approach she bluntly rejected and we had the Good Friday Agreement.
  • Her support for totalitarian right-wing regimes such as apartheid South Africa (she died condemning Mandela as a filthy terrorist) and Pinochet's Chile to name a few
  • The Poll Tax - born from the middle-class delusion that poverty is only a risk for the lazy, and its worst impact is minor inconvenience and maybe having to cut down on a few luxury items.


So many people are commenting from biased (left or right wing) commentaries, not from experience.

The most offensive aspect of the media breast-beating is the fatuous, but repeated view that "You might disagree with her policies, but she stuck by her convictions". WHAT?! Smiley: yikes
She was wrong, but committed to being wrong. Praise indeed. Smiley: oyvey

and I managed to get through that rant without a single Godwins

____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help