"trickle down theory" seems obviously correct to me. Like, if a person has lots of money, it's stupid to sit on it - they invest it, found businesses, hire people, buy things - all of which are putting money back into lower tiers of the economy to me. Am I missing something big?
-
-
Even if the money is just hoarded, it increases the purchasing power of people with lower incomes. So it’s no different to the rich people not getting the money at all.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The poorest people literally live paycheck to paycheck. They don't HAVE the extra money to save OR invest. Or if they do have the money to save they might not be able to risk it on an investment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That's nice of you. Many rich people choose instead to shelter their wealth in tax heavens and it has a negative impact on the home economy. It's not my opinion, it's how it works.
-
Wealthy folks utilise offshore banking to ensure their day in court— in the US anyone can be sued for anything and dragged to court. Offshore banking is another form of insurance— the negative impact are the bad laws which create this behavior
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What you call "actively" invested does not contribute to much to production. Very few of the shares you bought would be raising new capital. For the most part, you bought second-hand shares, contributed nothing to production and expect a never-ending stream of profits.
-
I lost the part where the never-ending stream of profits should come from for a shareholder? Why would one call it never ending?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
savings get invested in shit like uber and wework. massive wastes of money. meanwhile reduced taxes on on the rich means reduced investment in things like education that actually create wealth
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Do you mean investing in stocks? That money doesn't go directly to the company to spend and churn the economy more, it goes to whomever sold the stock. The price goes up and creates more paper wealth, yes, but what is the real value created that would trickle down and to whom?
-
If the price goes up, the company can sell their first-hand stocks more easily and finance more production with equity. Am I missing something?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
investing by buying stocks, holding equity, funds, ect is not not a trickle down method. This is concentrating wealth in an inactive state. agreed- no one holds cash for long term
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.