It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We have no more "coping mechanisms" to keep our economy alive....no more band-aids to compensate for the massive wealth inequity in the untited states. We need to stop shifting the wealth to the top 5% via tax breaks, bailouts, deregulation of the financial industry etc. and get the middle class healthy again or we are all screwed...middle class, lower class and the wealthiest. I am not alone in this realization...economists of every stripe and political leaning are observing the same thing.
In 1976 A typical American CEO earned 36 times as much as the average worker. By 2008 the average CEO pay increased to 369 times that of the average worker. timelines.ws...
Testimony by Mr. Morgan, the bank's president,First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969)
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. www.webofdebt.com...
When new money is created it does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Therefore money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money
It is these losses of the groups that are the last to be reached by the variation in the value of money which ultimately constitute the source of the profits made by the bankers and the groups most closely connected with them.
Originally posted by crankyoldman
reply to post by camaro68ss
There is one major fact that contradicts the trickle down theory - other than David Stockman the inventor of the meme who says it is bs: Currently corporations, those who are supposed to be stimulating the economy with jobs, are sitting on 1 trillion in cash. They are SITTING ON 1 trillion in cash. They are not spending it on jobs, or anything related to stimulating the economy. The are sitting on it and by doing so have effectively stopped growth.
Originally posted by debz325
Also if you want to create jobs for the poor eliminate corporate tax!!
Don't you see your hypocrisy? Who pays your salary and takes care of you. The Taxpayer!!
And it's debatable as to whether the military is cost effective. With the welfare going to the likes of Haliburton, KBR etc. with their corruption ripping off the American Taxpayer. Yet you begrudge the poor a decent lifestyle.
Perhaps if more attention was paid to the military ind. cplx and their corruption and stealing from the govt. we could train more of the poor to be productive. How about some solutions instead of Limbaugh rhetoric?
I'll stop you there. I had assumed during our discussion by your articulate and well constructed posts that you were older than you are.
You were a teenager when this financial crisis began.
You went from living at home and High School directly to military service?
You are 21? 18 or 19 when the market began to collapse? 12 when GW was elected?
Again...kudos for being bright for your age, but IMO you need to live in the world for a handful of years in a financially vulnerable way with folks depending on you and get a handle on your emotions before I can genuinely value your opinions.
My convictions were equally uncompromising at your age...and equally uninformed by real world experience...you will understand better what I mean in 10 years...for now you will think I am an a$#&**...and that's ok too.
The nation’s workers may be struggling, but U.S. companies just had their best quarter ever.
U.S. businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.659 trillion in the third quarter, according to a Commerce Department report released Tuesday. That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or noninflation-adjusted terms.
The government does not adjust the numbers for inflation, in part because these corporate profits can be affected by pricing changes from all over the world. The next-highest annual corporate profits level on record was in the third quarter of 2006, when they were $1.655 trillion.
This breakneck pace can be partly attributed to strong productivity growth — which means companies have been able to make more with less — as well as the fact that some of the profits of U.S. companies come from abroad. Economic conditions in the United States may still be sluggish, but many emerging markets like India and China are expanding rapidly.
Tuesday’s Commerce Department report also showed that the nation’s output grew at a slightly faster pace than originally estimated last quarter. Its growth rate, of 2.5 percent a year in inflation-adjusted terms, is higher than the initial estimate of 2 percent. The economy grew at a 1.7 percent annual rate in the second quarter.
Still, most economists say the current growth rate is far too slow to recover the considerable ground lost during the recession.
So trickle down works.....for the big companies, but wheres the help to the average worker? Didnt unemployment go up to 9.8% a week or two ago?
If a big company can lay off workers, and make a record profit at the same time, why would they hire more people?
Originally posted by Aim64C
Of course - you could increase taxes, but that simply ends up increasing the price - so your profits don't really change a whole lot - kind of like how bumping up minimum wage doesn't really change the standard of living for those working for 40hrs on minimum.
Originally posted by WTFover
1) They may reduce their workforce, putting more of the production burden on fewer employees. We have all seen this happen, before. Who gain? Who loses? Who continues the status quo?
2) They may increase prices. Who gains? Who loses? Who remains the same?
3) They may decrease employee benefits. Who gains? Who loses?
4) They may decrease quality? Who gains? Who loses?
5) They may just shut the doors. Who gains? Who loses?
Originally posted by Aim64C
I've got a hell of a lot of ideas and no capital to back them. I've got more ideas than I am likely to ever live down. I could buddy up with a senator or something and see if I could get one of those line-item earmarks to back an idea, but I doubt I could make the sell (and would rather avoid government subsidies).
Originally posted by Aim64C
Depends upon where you start the clock. I'd place the beginnings of the financial crisis before I was born. Though it wasn't triggered until early 2008 or so - which would place me at 19.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
So that the kids dont get confused and indoctrinated by communist propaganda, here's an easy and simple version of what trickle-down-economics means:
If I am doing good, I influence others positively. Others have nothing to gain from my poverty.
Hope that helps
edit on 17-12-2010 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by aching_knuckles
Uhhhh.....isnt this reasoning based on feeling, something "liberals" are always accused of? Where are the stats/numbers/facts/etc.?
Trickle down economics was supposed to be "If I am doing good, I will spend it and that will spur the economy",
but is this what has happened?