"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?
-
-
The mechanisms of Enron making paper money without doing any useful service are informative. They make a strong analogy for any more recent 'investments' that the very wealthy use their tax handouts for.
-
OK; but that's mostly "making money out of thin air by wiggling at the right time and playing the system". The original question was: why should capital be inert, instead of getting invested and used?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I definitely agree with the enron example as an extreme example. They did pretty much every type of manipulation they could. I don't think most companies do that much, but I think that most companies do some. I do recommend the book "The Smartest Guys in the Room"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The replies to this are so full of non-sequiturs. “Rich people will lose money to inflation if they don’t invest it.” “Oh yeah? Well Enron was a fraud.” Ok? And?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is just one example of many forms of rent seeking.
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.