Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Trickle Up Effect Vs. Trickle Down Economics
The Trickle Up Effect is defined as the economic theory used to describe the flow of wealth from the poor to the affluent.A common criticism of republicans and capitalism is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Capitalism by definition alone makes this argument just whining. I will make an argument for Trickle Down Economics by exposing and dismantling the Trickle Up Effect (Obamanomics/Clintonomics/FDR’s “Bad Deal”). Look, I like Robin Hood as much as the next guy. I mean that cute, cunning little fox helped all the forest folk by stealing from the evil Sheriff of Nottingham. It was a great story. Well, life’s not a cartoon. Here’s where the lunacy starts.
The trickle up effect states that benefits to the wealthy will be realized due to an increase in sales relative to the amount of benefits that are given to the poor. OK, you got me; I’m intrigued; do go on. The trickle up effect argues itself as more effective than the trickle down effect because people who have less tend to buy more. In other words, the poor are more inclined than the wealthy to spend their money. Why on earth are they poor then? This being so, proponents of the trickle up effect believe that if the lower and lower-middle classes are given benefits(paid for by increased tax rates on businesses and the “wealthy”), such as tax breaks or subsidies, the increased funds would be spent at a much higher rate than would the upper class, given similar fund increases. Furthermore, the trickle up effect argues, many upper-class individuals do not spend their entire yearly salary to begin with, which is an indication that they will not spend any additional funds. You mean being responsible? Instead, they will save additional funds, thereby withholding those funds from the economy and increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. The word withholding is actually slang for re-investing…I know it’s tricky. The trickle up effect avoids this pitfall by giving more money to those who would be more inclined to spend it. So, stop me if you’ve heard enough.
2 comments:
Wow. Interesting way of thinking of it. I look around at people who are wealthy and it seems they spend a lot more than the poor. But, I guess they probably do invest a lot more than buying tangible things....hmmmmm, something to think about.
It's true. I don't pretend to be some economic guru, but people with wealth, are wealthy because they were smarter with their money. I'm not saying everyone that's "poor" is not smart with their money, because Patti and I don't have a lot; at all. But we're super smart with it, and we make every bill when it needs to be made. Actually God helps us make every bill. :)
Post a Comment