Conversation

"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?

325

348

Replying to

Sounded feasible but we can say with complete certainty that it is incorrect, because we can look back at all the years since this theory was first implemented (early Reagan era I think) and see that in fact the money never trickled down.

Aella

@Aella_Girl

Replying to

@jbtiv

How do you tell if it did or didn't? Like, standard of living went up and poverty levels decreased, does that count as a sign of it working or no

7:09 PM · Dec 28, 2019

Replying to

I think you have to look at the wealth and see if it ultimately redistributed among lower classes. Since the 80s the opposite has happened. The 1%’s share of total wealth has increased since then and continues to while <1% has an ever decreasing piece of the pie.

Replying to

I guess I didn't think about 'redistribution' as being the goal, I thought of it as simply 'benefitting the lower class.' Reducing the wealth gap seems like weird goal to me - why do you care about how better the top people have it as long as your own experience is getting better

Show replies

Russ Meyer Cinematic Universe

Replying to

and

Poverty rates have remained roughly the same since the early 1980s, not gone down. You can look these things up, actually.