Trickle "UP" Economics or "Fountain" Economics

This is so obvious it's amazing that there aren't more people realizing the truth of it. It just happened to pop into my head right now and as I sit here thinking about it and how it would work and why it seems so obvious I can't believe I had never thought of it until now.

Now, before we start, just to let you know there is an official version of what Trickle Up Economics or Fountain Economics is. I haven't studied what the official version is or what it says and I won't be talking about that. I'll be talking about the idea as it popped in my head and how it's developed just by me thinking about it. My version and the official version may be the same or completely different, I don't know. But I don't see any reason anyone needs to study the official version to grasp this concept. It's really such an obvious idea that simple common sense is enough to understand it and see for yourself how undeniable the truth of it is. It is a completely self evident truth. So let's begin...

The reason "Trickle Down Economics" has been a failure is because wealth doesn't trickle down, it trickles up. This is an obvious truth in our reality and one that is clear to everyone even without any schooling in economics or business. Hell, you don't even have to be good with math or money to see and understand that the "Rich get Richer and the Poor get Poorer". So that being the case, the whole idea that money is going to flow naturally down toward the poor makes no sense. If that was the case it would be difficult to stay poor because money would be trickling down on you all over the place.

The reality is that it actually trickles up. Rich people own most all of the major money making industries and avenues of making money. Then the middle class and the poor basically don't own much of anything. But all classes still use money which is nothing more than exchanging symbols of value (money/dollars/coins/etc.) for labor. We all just trade these symbols back and forth with each other over and over, back and forth to get stuff.

Now, as the old saying goes, "It takes money to make money". This is very true. With money you no longer need to trade your labor for money. Your money works for you making more money for you. So having a lot of money or owning many businesses or whatever becomes the method of your income which of course "income" meaning more money. This is the heart of the whole idea. Wealth is used to attract more wealth. That's how it works. Even for the middle class which is why they start businesses. It takes money and labor to start a business and when done right it then brings in more money. Hopefully with the goal of slowly becoming prosperous enough to make money without your labor being needed but still bringing in wealth for you. Just think about it for a few moments and you'll see how blindingly obvious this is as the examples are everywhere.

So with all that in mind and understanding that wealth trickles up. It should be clear now why it's always been that "The Rich get Richer and the Poor get Poorer". But here's the best part. Unlike in the past where that idea seemed unfair or wrong from a social/economic perspective, once you understand it you see how the only thing wrong with that system is that we aren't using it correctly. It's not the fault of how the system works but how we work with the system.

Since it does no good waiting for wealth to trickle down, which we know isn't how it works, it then becomes clear that you have to shift it down manually and allow it naturally to trickle up. This is where some are going to start freaking out but don't listen to them. The truth of what I'm saying will become unquestionable to you all the more you think about it. Remember, common sense and just looking at the way the world operates and has always operated will prove this idea true over and over again.

Shifting wealth from the top to the bottom is the only way for prosperity and progress to happen. Just like a fountain, for it to continue operating the water must go back and be recycled through over and over. Same with money. The poorest among us will simply spend that money. This in turn is what keeps the businesses of the middle class and above operating and the wealth goes to them. Then they spend it on what they need and in their businesses and up it goes naturally toward the wealthiest among us like it always has. This is why the whole argument proves itself and shows why doing so benefits everyone. Yes, even those on the top and the middle. The wealth goes right back toward the wealthiest among us naturally while traveling through every other class below them on the way. That is what a functioning economy is and how it works.

How you get the money from the top to the bottom can be done in many different ways. But if nothing else and if all other avenues aren't working well enough there is always taxing them. But it can and is done in other ways. This is where understanding the system and how to use it works and why. It doesn't matter if the wealthiest people own everything or not. It doesn't mean you have to make them poor or think of the system as broken. You just need to understand the flow of wealth and use it correctly. Whoever own everything doesn't matter, let them. As long as there is a constant and adequate flow of some of their wealth back to the bottom so it can flow back up. But it has to go to the bottom to help everyone. Because remember, where it shifts down to is where it then starts going back to them again. So the more toward the bottom it goes the more people it helps as it flows back toward the top again.

This is obviously just the basic idea so far but hopefully you get the idea and can take it from here on your own and study more about the official version too. I just thought I'd throw this out there because it seems so obvious now and so 'in your face" yet I'd never really thought of it before. It explains why things are so messed up but more importantly how simple it is to fix the system by just changing a few things we've screwed up. Like the whole concept of wealth trickling down which is BS. Tax breaks on the most wealthy with the idea it's going to help anyone else but them or stimulate the whole economy. That isn't how it works. If you want more money to flow through everyone's pockets which is what a healthy economy actually is, you have to shift the wealth back down to the bottom. Don't listen to the those who tell you "It's socialism and robbery etc." It doesn't have to be like that. Think of it objectively and honestly.

Changing a few policies and patterns in how things work can and will benefit everyone, not just those on top of the pyramid. After all, if the system crashes, even they lose. The only way we all win is to understand how the system really works and then for us to work with it too. Don't fight the flow because of the lies you've been told. You'll never win trying to walk against the current. You must flow with it to get anywhere. Let's stop fighting what is naturally working against us and instead "Go with the Flow" so we can all benefit.

Wow it's so obvious.



That was sarcasm, by the way.



Meanwhile... why should a person want to prosper from 'the bottom' when they will have their prosperity taken from them when they actually succeed (ie reach 'the top'?)?

a reply to: mOjOm

This is a great idea, I just feel that those on the labor level (AKA the ones doing most of the work) are kept in the dark and are at least an arm's length from the "actual" numbers, don't have enough control to make this difference to shift from the current system to a new Trickle Up system


I AM all for this though.. but to me, #1 priority would be finding a way to apply it which I don't know how to do

The bottom will still be on the bottom

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Wow it's so obvious.



That was sarcasm, by the way.



Meanwhile... why should a person want to prosper from 'the bottom' when they will have their prosperity taken from them when they actually succeed (ie reach 'the top'?)?

Because wanting to prosper is something we all want to various degrees naturally. The only thing this changes is it provides a course for one to take to prosper as much as they want. Right now, we work against a system which is going against us. We have been told that wealth goes down, it doesn't it goes up. So when we shift our wealth up to the top with the idea it's going to flow down we've messed up. It naturally flows up, so all we've done is waste our labor putting it where it was going in the first place.

It would be like gathering buckets of water from the top of the river and manually bringing them down the hill rather than just letting it flow there. Instead if we take from where it flows to (the top) and push it back to where it starts then it would flow on it's own back to the top again and hitting everyone in the middle on the way there.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The bottom will still be on the bottom

The bottom will still always be the bottom and the top the top. We can't change this and we don't need to. It's ok that there is a top and bottom. After all that is what creates the flow. If it was level nothing would happen. We just need to change the way we shift the wealth around manually. We keep sending it to the top. But the top doesn't need it. It flows there already naturally. The very wealthy literally at a point make too much money to even spend it fast enough. It just keeps coming in. Which is ok, that's how it works. We just need to remember to shift some back down to the bottom again so the flow continues. Otherwise the fountain can no longer push anything through. It's like having all the fountain water floating in the air at the top because gravity didn't push it back down to where the pump is at.

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: mOjOm

This is a great idea, I just feel that those on the labor level (AKA the ones doing most of the work) are kept in the dark and are at least an arm's length from the "actual" numbers, don't have enough control to make this difference to shift from the current system to a new Trickle Up system


I AM all for this though.. but to me, #1 priority would be finding a way to apply it which I don't know how to do

You're right. But the fact is that we have no choice but to figure it out. The rich need to figure it out too even though they may think they're fine because they have all the wealth, that isn't correct. Because a broken system is broken for everyone. So the more intense the divide becomes the closer the system is to collapse and when that happens a bunch of paper squares don't mean anything. All they'll do is help you wipe up your tears or soak up the blood. They system must keep flowing with a nice flow from the bottom to the top and then be pushed back to the bottom again. One way or another this is how it works and it does no good for anyone to fight against it. We have to learn to work with it.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Wow it's so obvious.



That was sarcasm, by the way.



Meanwhile... why should a person want to prosper from 'the bottom' when they will have their prosperity taken from them when they actually succeed (ie reach 'the top'?)?

Here's a simple truth: in order for one to prosper, one must step over others.

As an illustrative example, consider the case of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak:

In 1973, Jobs was working for arcade game company Atari, Inc. in Los Gatos, California. He was assigned to create a circuit board for the arcade video game Breakout. According to Atari co-founder Nolan Bushnell, Atari offered $100 for each chip that was eliminated in the machine. Jobs had little knowledge of circuit board design and made a deal with Wozniak to split the fee evenly between them if Wozniak could minimize the number of chips. Wozniak reduced the number of chips by 50 by using RAM for the brick representation. Too complex to be fully comprehended at the time, the fact that this prototype also had no scoring or coin mechanisms meant Woz's prototype could not be used. Jobs was paid the full bonus regardless. Jobs told Wozniak that Atari gave them only $700 and that Wozniak's share was thus $350.

In case you didn't get the math, Atari paid Jobs $5000.
Jobs 'evenly split' that... by paying Woz $350.

a reply to: mOjOm

great point - so where do we start (other than starting the dialogue?)
grassroots movements? I see this with the Bernie Sanders campaign and yet the opposition effectively pulls the "socialist/stigmatize" card and immediately dices credibility of the movement..

people in large groups are very predictable, and at this point it's so difficult to wake people up to this scam of a system

a reply to: mOjOm


I understand what you are saying but I don't agree it would work.

When you give everybody more money to spend, prices such as rent will go up to compensate. Then you would be no better off. Yes you might have more money but you can't buy any more with the money.
That's a viscous circle.

a reply to: FamCore

You're right. That's how I see it too. I think you have to start, like you say, by first having this conversation. Like I pointed out, very few people I think even see it this way. I mean, I've thought about how messed up our economy is and why and how it got here and yet this never really came to mind until now. At least not like it has now. I mean I saw the problems but never really thought about it at it's core.

I also would get hung up thinking that it was unfair and about who deserves what and why. But this way, you can put all that aside. It doesn't matter how someone got to the top with all the wealth. It makes no difference on how the function of wealth flows. Whether they're rich because they earned it or because it was given to them it still operates the same and with the same ramifications. Maybe they're just a rich little bastard who lives a life completely serving themselves. Maybe the opposite.

But the fact that their wealth continues to create more wealth for them is a fact and it's that fact that must be understood. At that point their wealth has become an system of getting more and more wealth through investments or whatever. They can't really stop it at that point so who they are and how they choose to live because of it doesn't matter. What matters is understanding what is happening with that money and how it must be used to keep the system as a whole functioning.

a reply to: mOjOm

I'm not sold at all, but interesting points. Perhaps the flow isn't as simple as up or down. Maybe static building and discharging would be a closer analogy. I'm trying to imagine what the effects would be. The first thing I envision is low paying jobs becoming harder to staff. So more people will be moving their own lawns. Fruits may become more luxury items. Generally I see a chain reaction driving all prices up, but it's hard for me to see past the initial impact. I don't think things would go as smoothly as you'd hope.

It would be interesting if someone would experiment with these types of theories in an MMO or something. I wander if they already have software models that could help shed light on these things.

a reply to: Bluntone22

You're not thinking about the continuing and ongoing flow of it though. You're stopping at giving people money but you have to keep going. When people have money, especially if they are at the bottom and middle, they spend that money. Unless they are afraid to spend it that is. Otherwise, they use it. It does them no good just to keep it. Money doesn't do anyone any good to just hold it. It's worthless. Using it keeps things moving. It's like electrons. If they weren't flowing from one place to another all our toys would just sit there looking at us dong nothing.

The problem is that too much wealth is being held at the top. Find reasons to put it back down to the bottom. Jobs, charity, whatever. Just get it there. It's going to flow back up, it has no choice. Because the top is the destination of all the other systems which operate on the flow of money. So the more money is being spent and shifted around the more things keep moving around. It's only when wealth becomes stagnate and still somewhere and is being blocked up or restricted from flowing in the system when things start shutting down. Our problem is that literally, too few have too much and just can't or don't put it back fast enough. It just keeps growing and collecting in one spot and is being damned up and isn't flowing back to where it starts fast enough.

a reply to: VP740

Try this google search and look at what comes up. People already know this. Conservatives and Liberals, Rich and Poor. Some have realized this already and are just now realizing the impact of it.

a reply to: mOjOm

A catch phrase on Google. I'm sure all those links are scientific and unbiased.

a reply to: mOjOm

It can even be seen right now. This is why welfare programs increase economic growth. If people were paid more, they would spend more, get taxed more, and businesses would see those profits, all the while enabling those on the bottom to better equip themselves to be even more productive, thus continuing the cycle.

Instead, the bottom folks don't get paid enough, get welfare (taxed mostly from the middle class and a few in the upper class who failed to find loopholes), and then use that money on survival purchases, never getting ahead or empowered to improve their station in life.

So... in a trickle up economy, everybody wins. In a trickle down economy, the poor working class loses, the middle class loses, and the upper class isn't winning as much as it could.

Hey Mojom, what is your opinion of a Maximum wage & do you think it could fit into your concept at all?

It would be difficult to implement but could force a lot more money back into company coffers & employee salaries overall.

a reply to: Abysha

Wouldn't welfare be a form of fountain economics?

originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Abysha

Wouldn't welfare be a form of fountain economics?

Not really, because it comes from the taxes of everybody who doesn't profit from the recipients. The people who profit from the recipients (their minimum wage employers) should be paying for it.

Ultimately, we will someday need to simply have a "mandatory salary" for every American, no matter their employment or economic status. We are approaching an era where automation is increasing GDP and jobs are diminishing. If we don't convert into a "post employment economy", we will end up with half the nation unemployed and no way for them to survive without turning to crime or just starving to death.

If we aren't prepared for that, we will fall apart completely. Employment rate isn't going to get better. And that is okay. We just need to think about it differently.

a reply to: Abysha

I'm sure there are many who think the idea of basic income is horrible & reprehensible. The machines can't take over soon enough imo, we need a reality check.