American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[Azure]

Was the stock market ever meant to trickle down? What a stupid comment.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by Azure

Was the stock market ever meant to trickle down? What a stupid comment.

No, but tax cuts for those primarily benefiting from rising stocks were supposed to. They would spend the money they saved but that mostly went back into the pockets of the rich, or they would buy back more of their company's stocks, benefiting no one but themselves, and other stockholders.

That's why it's all bull####.

[calgarygeologist]

I wasn't expecting to see this:

Canada's ambassador to the United States says "we're very happy" that Ohio Senator J.D. Vance is Donald Trump's vice-presidential running mate because of the senator's connections to Canada.

In an interview with CBC's Power & Politics on Monday, Kirsten Hillman said Vance is "someone we know well at the embassy" who has been seen at "many events supporting the Canada-U.S. relationship."

"That's a good thing for us, that he has this high level of knowledge," Hillman added.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...lman-1.7264413

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I wasn't expecting to see this:


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...lman-1.7264413

That could be good news but he's Trump's bitch man now so he'll need to toe the MAGA party line, which is very protectionist.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Ped

Something trickled down on me, but definitely not money.

Username sorta lines up I guess.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I wasn't expecting to see this:


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...lman-1.7264413

This seems like preparing for the inevitability of a Trump win. Trump is going to throw tariffs on everything we throw south, so they are cozying up to their only hope to curb things a bit.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I wasn't expecting to see this:


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...lman-1.7264413

I mean, it's not necessarily a bad thing to have a VP in the U.S. that is familiar with Canada.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Azure

Was the stock market ever meant to trickle down? What a stupid comment.

You’re extra feisty today aren’t you?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

Was the stock market ever meant to trickle down? What a stupid comment.

The reduction in taxation that allows these profits is supposed to go into the economy to be spent which is supposed to lift up everyone.

So yes if trickle down economics worked the high stock prices would be reflective of overall prosperity.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

No, but tax cuts for those primarily benefiting from rising stocks were supposed to. They would spend the money they saved but that mostly went back into the pockets of the rich, or they would buy back more of their company's stocks, benefiting no one but themselves, and other stockholders.

That's why it's all bull####.

Whether the money is spent hiring more workers, or it's spent on stock buybacks, the money is still re-entering the economy.

The reason it's bull#### is because it's inflationary, and government spending needs to be cut back to make up for the revenue loss, or government debt keeps growing and causing further inflation.

So the poor and middle class get hit with a double whammy: higher cost of living hitting them on one side, cuts to programs hitting them on the other.

Seriously, #### trickle-down ecofraudics. One of the worst and most damaging ideas of all time.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Do you mean to tell me that the money from that record high stock market hasn’t trickled down? I’m…what’s the word I’m looking for here…no not stunned…the opposite of that.

Due to post-covid labour shortages in the service industry, low-wage earners have seen their highest real-dollar wage earnings in decades. It’s most other workers who have seen their wages stagnate. And since the higher wages in the service industry have led to higher prices for all consumers, more people feel the pinch.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Due to post-covid labour shortages in the service industry, low-wage earners have seen their highest real-dollar wage earnings in decades. It’s most other workers who have seen their wages stagnate. And since the higher wages in the service industry have led to higher prices for all consumers, more people feel the pinch.

So essentially those raises had nothing to do with lower tax rates?

[Harry Lime]

It's those damn rich, poor people!

[KelVarnsen]

Rich people need food too

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

https://news.gallup.com/poll/645515/...month-row.aspx

It's a weird economy right now. There are lots of jobs, and economic indicators are good, but inflation continues to hurt everyone and was always going to be Biden's biggest obstacle.

The message Biden or someone needs to get across is that Trump's plans to fight inflation are completely bonkers and will make things dramatically worse.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/07/03...tion-election/

The economic conditions inherited by Biden were tough, and the current administration along with the Federal reserve have done a rather remarkable job of taming inflation while keeping the economy rolling, but hardly anyone sees it that way.

The fact that Biden can't get that message across is the biggest reason he needs to go.

Getting out of Covid is a worldwide problem, in fact the USA ranks 9th best for the lowest inflation out of 195 countries, Canada is 10th BTW.

I agree, Biden should use this message but for some crazy reason he doesn't

[Azure]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

That could be good news but he's Trump's bitch man now so he'll need to toe the MAGA party line, which is very protectionist.

Comments like this are fascinating.

I admit that I knew next to nothing about Vance prior to him being the VP pick, but as soon as you take 5 min to read about his economic ideas, mostly about re industrializing the midwest one should quickly realize that Canada could be a major part of that.

American manufacturing can be supported by natural resources from Canada. Especially if we know that clean energy production will likely be a huge part of the future going forward when it comes to manufacturing, and knowing that Canada has what the world needs.

But given our history as a country, I guess we'll resort to MAAGAAGAQA!!!!! omg don't let them build dirty lithium & copper mines, similar to the anti-natural gas bull#### phase we've been dealing with the past 25 years.

I suspect that given Trudeau's push to get manufacturers from the US & Europe to realize this, that they were able to put aside their petty stupidity for 5 seconds and see a future where Canada and the US can both benefit, again.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

No, but tax cuts for those primarily benefiting from rising stocks were supposed to. They would spend the money they saved but that mostly went back into the pockets of the rich, or they would buy back more of their company's stocks, benefiting no one but themselves, and other stockholders.

That's why it's all bull####.

Ah trickle down economics hurts my head every time someone brings it up, the greatest scam ever pulled.

"If you give me more money, I'll you'll have more money"

I'm not sure if many realize this, but if you want money returned to the market quickly the best place to put it is in the hands of the poor. If you want directed spending, the best way is to build social infrastructure that will benefit all in the future. If you want corporate investment the best way to get that is to create demand (see first 2 points). At no point does filling up Musks bank account to the point that he can afford to pay for a merger of Xter and Truth attain any of those 3 goals.

[Just a guy]

Originally Posted by #-3

Ah trickle down economics hurts my head every time someone brings it up, the greatest scam ever pulled.

"If you give me more money, I'll you'll have more money"

I'm not sure if many realize this, but if you want money returned to the market quickly the best place to put it is in the hands of the poor. If you want directed spending, the best way is to build social infrastructure that will benefit all in the future. If you want corporate investment the best way to get that is to create demand (see first 2 points). At no point does filling up Musks bank account to the point that he can afford to pay for a merger of Xter and Truth attain any of those 3 goals.

Using your post, but also more as a general comment from what I am reading.

Using Elon Musk as the example, how many people are employed at his companies? These are also well paying jobs. How much has these companies paid out over time just to employees? To suppliers (more jobs) and contractors (more jobs)? I don’t know that I would call this trickle down, but just normal business, but on a scale much larger than say Pete the Plumber! The question is “How much money has Elon Musk put back into the economy?”.

I like how a lot of people compare the paper worth of Elon Musk and others, versus actual cash wealth. They want to tax an unrealized profit from share holding, which may decline the following year. How often have we heard of someone losing billions in a day due to market activity? These billions could have been taxed the day before. Is that fair?

As for increased costs, this hurts the more as you move down the economic scale. More and more people will decide not to buy something due to the costs (example: one less trip to McDonalds for the kids this month). The old saying that there is no better cure for high prices than high prices themselves. High prices reduce demand!

Knowing it is not this simplistic, but when you print more money and there is not a corresponding growth in product and services, then you are devaluing the money, which leads to inflation. Water will always find its level and that is what we are seeing. Some people are making out like bandits and others are being hurt. This will change over time once the turmoil settles down. Not saying there won’t always be wealthy people and poor people, because there will. Just that market forces will normalize things in the long run.

My thoughts!

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Just a guy

Using your post, but also more as a general comment from what I am reading.

Using Elon Musk as the example, how many people are employed at his companies? These are also well paying jobs. How much has these companies paid out over time just to employees? To suppliers (more jobs) and contractors (more jobs)? I don’t know that I would call this trickle down, but just normal business, but on a scale much larger than say Pete the Plumber! The question is “How much money has Elon Musk put back into the economy?”.

I like how a lot of people compare the paper worth of Elon Musk and others, versus actual cash wealth. They want to tax an unrealized profit from share holding, which may decline the following year. How often have we heard of someone losing billions in a day due to market activity? These billions could have been taxed the day before. Is that fair?

As for increased costs, this hurts the more as you move down the economic scale. More and more people will decide not to buy something due to the costs (example: one less trip to McDonalds for the kids this month). The old saying that there is no better cure for high prices than high prices themselves. High prices reduce demand!

Knowing it is not this simplistic, but when you print more money and there is not a corresponding growth in product and services, then you are devaluing the money, which leads to inflation. Water will always find its level and that is what we are seeing. Some people are making out like bandits and others are being hurt. This will change over time once the turmoil settles down. Not saying there won’t always be wealthy people and poor people, because there will. Just that market forces will normalize things in the long run.

My thoughts!

Sorry, but your conclusion is things will balance themselves out because of *snicker* market forces? Interesting, if you ignore all past evidence and trends of wealth consolidation at the top. Market forces have perpetuated this trend, so why would it change?

[Just a guy]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Sorry, but your conclusion is things will balance themselves out because of *snicker* market forces? Interesting, if you ignore all past evidence and trends of wealth consolidation at the top. Market forces have perpetuated this trend, so why would it change?

You are taking one part of the comment and using it to backstop your bias. Yes high prices do drive down demand and leads to lower prices. That is the point where things will level out. I made the point that there will be wealthy and poor people, so not sure where you think my statement was wrong.

I get that you have a hate for anyone that has a great deal of wealth and think they should be stripped of their wealth to pay for things that you want. You just don't want to or have the ability to go get these on your own. I say that not maliciously, but as an observation of your arguments over time. You want to change something go do it. Sitting on a discussion board with a majority of like minded folks isn't going to change the world