56 share
Not shown on the graph but reported by the NY Times, poverty now includes 14.3% of the population. And, taxpayers have spent 13 trillion dollars on this nonsense. Understand that 13 trillion is 5 times the cost of all US wars combined. Would someone come up with a better idea? Please. Also, make note that "poverty" in the US puts our "poor" in the top 20% of the world's population as to wealth and material possessions. Statistically, there are virtually no poor, living the US., by comparative world standards.
__________________
Source of information: NY Times, here.
Yea, how's that trickle-down workin for ya?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/08/taxes-who-pays-how-much-in-eight-charts/
So, specifically, what is the alternative to "trickle down?" I say there is no alternative, and you say . . . . . . . ? You think "upward mobility" is the product of government entitlements and welfare? And why is government handing out welfare checks, NOT "trickle down?"
ReplyDeleteWhat is the alternatiive to the workforce being employed by "the man?" You haven't a clue, do you. Man funds business and hires employees. That's trickle down. Again, your alternative is . . . . . . . . . . ?
I will make a wager with my readership: Mr. Anonymous will not venture an answer that is something other than "trickle down." Let's put a thousand bucks on it, shall we?
Bush cut taxes on the wealthy when he got into office. Like twenty years earlier under Reagan, most Americans benefited little. Bush launched a recession, poverty and income inequality grew. During Obama’s recovery, the wealthy have rebounded as Wall Street is at an all time high, corporate profits are at an all time high, but the economy for the rest of Americans has remained stagnant. NO trickle.
ReplyDeleteConservatives like to point out that it is government regulations preventing the rest of us from grabbing a piece of the pie. Tell me what regulations prevent a billion dollar corporation from handing out a livable wage or hiring the required workforce? They would rather hoard it in the Cayman’s, hire cheap labor from Asia. That's how they define success.
Under Clinton, poverty plummeted and he taxed the rich at 39.6%. The corner is just being turned after the damage of Bush. Most experts said it would take a decade, poverty is just beginning to come down.
The solution is to fund public and government jobs for infrastructure and efficiency, return to the proven successful Clinton tax rates, stop corporate tax shelters and loopholes. Then we can catch up to Europe where they can go anywhere on a modern train while Americans sit in smog-choked traffic.
Most wages earned by corporate employees (97%) are "living wages," Clinton cut the dividend tax which, in turn, fuel his economic recovery. You cannot make the connection between taxing the rich at higher rates and reduced poverty. And, when you finally get to your solution (thanks for trying, seriously), you cite trickle down economics via federally funded jobs. I was a general engineering contractor in my younger days. We bid for a job, won that bid, and hired employees and independent contractors to work that job. Its all "trickle down." The only difference, in your scheme, is that the money used to partially fund a job and used for federally sponsored trickle down, is taken from the tax paying businessman and working class - rich, middle class, and the upper levels of the poor working class. Again, there is no alternative to "trickle down." When the government takes money out of the economy via taxation and uses some of it to partially fund (the feds never "fully" fund anything) infrastructure, that is trickle down. And you offer no exception to this reality - the only reality for any economy, whether Marxist or Capitalist.
ReplyDelete