Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
MWF, 8am
7 comments:
Jorge Salas
said...
From what I understand of the subject, I'm leaning towards agreeing that the trikle down plan was not the best choice to help the economy, and to me its just a combination of the goverment picking an easy quick fix to solve the problem and the fact that most politics are in the big corporation's pockets. Its not that I don't think its not working, just that there seems to be alot more better solutions to help the economy and no real reasons not to do them.
I think that giving broad tax cuts to all citizens rather than to upper class citizens would benefit more of the population as a whole here in the United States. Or why not just lower taxes for the middle and lower class? I have to agree with what proponents of Keynesian Economics have to say on the issue of tax cuts for the wealthy. It makes no sense to me why the government would even give the wealthy upper class citizens a tax cut? What have they done to deserve that? No!! I can't agree more with Linda Beale and James K. Galbraith. It’s the truth.
Some of the ideas given to help stimulate the economy are good; maybe over time. But will not work now. We need to stop the programs that aren't working, for example social security. Why not give people their whole check instead of taking a good portion of it? There won’t even be money left in the program when most of the current generation of young people finally does retire. Just stop it all together or give us an option, a choice if you will, to let the government worry about our retirement or ourselves. And in my honest opinion I just can’t see how "Trickle-down Economics" would actually work. Those tax cuts for a business wouldn't help the broad population. It would basically mean more profit for those businesses which would put more money in the pockets of the already wealthy fat cat business executives. We already get low prices from bulk resellers such as Bj’s (that huge warehouse where you have to purchase a membership to shop there), Wal-Mart and Target. From my own personal experience I can say that they only care about making profit. They will cut an employee’s hours and overwork a smaller amount of employees (who already get paid maybe minimum wage) just to make profit. And those companies already cut corners by having their merchandise made overseas in third world country “sweat-shops”.
The trickle-down economics allow small business to create more jobs, more jobs mean peaceful in the society, more money in circulation, more expenses, and more investment also. This will gives a new breath to the economy that is in crisis “coeteris paribus". In that case, one of the objectives of the trickle-down economics would be reached i.e. reducing gap between high and low income according to the redistribution theory. Let’s see the reality, in spite the trickledown effect the US economy is still stagnant and risk to hit another recession in three years is still present. Why the trickle-down economics do not work. I have two explanations: 1. Economics agents are afraid to invest more money in the market in spite of they pay less taxes. By freezing their money, they reduce their expenses margin, less investment, laid- off employees or shut down the company.
2. If the money of the trickle down goes directly to consuming only and not investment. The money will go back to this origin, the rich; it is the "Boomerang effect". More money, less productivity causes the worst enemy in the economy, inflation.
The tickling down the economy in itself, is a good idea. It is true that a nation's economy is directly influenced with the investments companies make. The better one's country economy is, the better the population can get paid. It is like a cycle with no end, if we do not take into considerations external factors, such as foreign countries which also play a big role in our daily economy. By cutting of taxes as it was mentioned, the investments can be more important and in this idea benefiting everybody. Since this theory is only a long term benefiting one, the variables cannot change during this period of time. The only problem to this theory, is like I just wrote, the external factors. We do not have control or power over other countries' economy, even though we can deeply influence them. In other words, it is impossible to be sure of the outcome.
I agree with the trickle down economic policy. I feel that if top income earners invest more into businesses it will improve the standard of living for the middle and lower working class, It would create more jobs, Higher wages for the average workers, And would create an overall upturn in the economy. with more jobs being provided the economy would eventualy benefit more needless to say the trickle down economic policy would not only be an asset to small business owners and less fortunate individuals, It would inevidably benefit everyone.The economy is so delapidated that we as people forget that we need each other, If not only for the exchange of goods and services. I see no reason to provide top income earners with the same tax breaks and benefits as the lower income earners, For that will not improve our current situation. In doing so consequently we will end up right back where we started "rich get richer" and "poor get poorer" theory. By having those who generate a higher income they invest in equity markets and business infrastructure, The rate of employment would increase and the cost of goods will decrease. In hine sight everyone is or will be effected by our economy if we continue to overlook its present state.
In the long run, tax cuts would only increase our deficit and economic woes, but tax increases would result in the loss of many americans' economic stability. There is not an easy fix to economic problems. I can't say one solution is better than the other or that one is right and one is wrong because there are major pros and cons that result from each action, with which many people will not agree.
In the long run, tax cuts would only increase our deficit and economic woes, but tax increases would result in the loss of many americans' economic stability. There is not an easy fix to economic problems. I can't say one solution is better than the other or that one is right and one is wrong because there are major pros and cons that result from each action, with which many people will not agree.
7 comments:
From what I understand of the subject, I'm leaning towards agreeing that the trikle down plan was not the best choice to help the economy, and to me its just a combination of the goverment picking an easy quick fix to solve the problem and the fact that most politics are in the big corporation's pockets. Its not that I don't think its not working, just that there seems to be alot more better solutions to help the economy and no real reasons not to do them.
I think that giving broad tax cuts to all citizens rather than to upper class citizens would benefit more of the population as a whole here in the United States. Or why not just lower taxes for the middle and lower class?
I have to agree with what proponents of Keynesian Economics have to say on the issue of tax cuts for the wealthy. It makes no sense to me why the government would even give the wealthy upper class citizens a tax cut? What have they done to deserve that? No!! I can't agree more with Linda Beale and James K. Galbraith. It’s the truth.
Some of the ideas given to help stimulate the economy are good; maybe over time. But will not work now. We need to stop the programs that aren't working, for example social security. Why not give people their whole check instead of taking a good portion of it? There won’t even be money left in the program when most of the current generation of young people finally does retire. Just stop it all together or give us an option, a choice if you will, to let the government worry about our retirement or ourselves.
And in my honest opinion I just can’t see how "Trickle-down Economics" would actually work. Those tax cuts for a business wouldn't help the broad population. It would basically mean more profit for those businesses which would put more money in the pockets of the already wealthy fat cat business executives.
We already get low prices from bulk resellers such as Bj’s (that huge warehouse where you have to purchase a membership to shop there), Wal-Mart and Target. From my own personal experience I can say that they only care about making profit. They will cut an employee’s hours and overwork a smaller amount of employees (who already get paid maybe minimum wage) just to make profit. And those companies already cut corners by having their merchandise made overseas in third world country “sweat-shops”.
The trickle-down economics allow small business to create more jobs, more jobs mean peaceful in the society, more money in circulation, more expenses, and more investment also. This will gives a new breath to the economy that is in crisis “coeteris paribus". In that case, one of the objectives of the trickle-down economics would be reached i.e. reducing gap between high and low income according to the redistribution theory. Let’s see the reality, in spite the trickledown effect the US economy is still stagnant and risk to hit another recession in three years is still present. Why the trickle-down economics do not work. I have two explanations:
1. Economics agents are afraid to invest more money in the market in spite of they pay less taxes. By freezing their money, they reduce their expenses margin, less investment, laid- off employees or shut down the company.
2. If the money of the trickle down goes directly to consuming only and not investment. The money will go back to this origin, the rich; it is the "Boomerang effect". More money, less productivity causes the worst enemy in the economy, inflation.
The tickling down the economy in itself, is a good idea. It is true that a nation's economy is directly influenced with the investments companies make. The better one's country economy is, the better the population can get paid. It is like a cycle with no end, if we do not take into considerations external factors, such as foreign countries which also play a big role in our daily economy. By cutting of taxes as it was mentioned, the investments can be more important and in this idea benefiting everybody. Since this theory is only a long term benefiting one, the variables cannot change during this period of time. The only problem to this theory, is like I just wrote, the external factors. We do not have control or power over other countries' economy, even though we can deeply influence them. In other words, it is impossible to be sure of the outcome.
I agree with the trickle down economic policy. I feel that if top income earners invest more into businesses it will improve the standard of living for the middle and lower working class, It would create more jobs, Higher wages for the average workers, And would create an overall upturn in the economy. with more jobs being provided the economy would eventualy benefit more needless to say the trickle down economic policy would not only be an asset to small business owners and less fortunate individuals, It would inevidably benefit everyone.The economy is so delapidated that we as people forget that we need each other, If not only for the exchange of goods and services. I see no reason to provide top income earners with the same tax breaks and benefits as the lower income earners, For that will not improve our current situation. In doing so consequently we will end up right back where we started "rich get richer" and
"poor get poorer" theory. By having those who generate a higher income they invest in equity markets and business infrastructure, The rate of employment would increase and the cost of goods will decrease. In hine sight everyone is or will be effected by our economy if we continue to overlook its present state.
In the long run, tax cuts would only increase our deficit and economic woes, but tax increases would result in the loss of many americans' economic stability. There is not an easy fix to economic problems. I can't say one solution is better than the other or that one is right and one is wrong because there are major pros and cons that result from each action, with which many people will not agree.
In the long run, tax cuts would only increase our deficit and economic woes, but tax increases would result in the loss of many americans' economic stability. There is not an easy fix to economic problems. I can't say one solution is better than the other or that one is right and one is wrong because there are major pros and cons that result from each action, with which many people will not agree.
Post a Comment