Nerfonomics

[Litenbror]

I think the missing piece of Trickle Down understanding is that ... Trickle down isn't aimed at making everybody rich ... its aimed at employment.
Its not aimed at lifting the quality of employment ... thats up to the individual and choices made.

As much as I hate Hockey's "... get a better job" or Ivanka Trumps "...find something new" ... boil these down to its simplest message ... its about choice. Do something about your circumstance or dont ... aspire or dont ... work hard or chose the easy path ... use your brains or dont.

Thats not a rich or poor thing, Left or Right thing ... its life. Is this part of trickle down ??? I think it is from a psychological point of view,

More practically, think about all those Cafes (Hospitality in general. Tourism is a fantastic example of trickle down), Personal trainers, Gym providers, cleaners, tatoo artists, landscapers/gardeners, pool cleaners, strata providers, Tradies, kitchen businesses, Bicycle Workshops (not retail but workshop specific), nail saloons, Massage places, Physios, Vets ... Fucking Vets and Gyms are my pet peeves (think about all the real estate these fuckers take up and drive up rents)

Thinking Sydney ... specifically Financial Services ... all those buggers with solid incomes ... by no means do they all think they are rich ... thats the trickle down ... think about the number of cafes and or coffee specific businesses in the CBD, now versus 20 years ago. Thats from them ... How many of you have cleaners ... go to the Gym ... have tatoos ... have renovated or put in a new kitchen or bathroom in the last 5 years (think about your parents, how many renos did you live through as a kid ... zip, maybe 1) ... think about the number of people in super cars ... they can't all be bankers, billionaires and drug dealers. Thats trickle down ... you are trickle down.

My next door neighbours are Chinese ... I dont really talk to them really ... so take the following as poetic license ... they work long fucking hours, usually gone before 6am and back around 9pm ... not sure if its 7 days a week but seems like it ... I believe they are laundry people for restaurants ... or sex traffickers based purely on the dark tint and bars on the back windows of their SLWB Hiace ... Beamers and Mercs applenty, two story house in the inner west ... all anecdotal I know ... but thats trickle down and its also hard graft. Immigrants are a fantastic example of trickle down ... they are willing to eat shit, work hard, start a business, all usually to offer a service to support your consumption in the majority.

But as we have seen, all these fuckers above are the first to get smashed as we tighten belts and become more spend conscious. This highlights trickle down relationships in reverse per se ... in my mind.

In Summary
Think broader on what trickle down is and where it actually originates from.
If you think you aren't benefiting from trickle down then you have a choice to make.

edit: procrastination is bad ... I made the wrong choice

I think this is a massive over simplification that doesn't recognise the entrenchment of inequality that trickle down contributes to. Trickle down has relentlessly broken down the workforce that there are fewer and fewer better choices for people to make. This is only a problem for the lower socio economic rung of the ladder because the people you quoted didn't have to make choices they were just given what they believed they deserved. Just my 2 cents.

TLDR. Trickle down doesn't just consolidated wealth at the top it reduces opportunity which can translate to choices at the bottom.

 

[hifiandmtb]

^^^ Aye, Nerf thinks the gig economy is the awesomeness.

One of a billion graphs showing shit ain't working:

 

[leitch]

I think we can largely agree that the Nerfonomics thread is basically just a place for old mate to jerk off into a mirror, no?

 

[Ultra Lord]

^^^ Aye, Nerf thinks the gig economy is the awesomeness.

One of a billion graphs showing shit ain't working:

They need to pick themselves up by their bootstraps. Lazy poor people.

 

[Kerplunk]

I think we can largely agree that the Nerfonomics thread is basically just a place for old mate to jerk off into a mirror, no?

Kinda of, the whole whole trickle down thing is basically about aspiration to an extent.. That everyone wants something better than they have.. And that’s not necessarily wrong.. As we do here on this very forum, better frames with cool geo, better brakes, better carbon wheels etc.. If there is no aspiration to do better in whatever we do then humanity basically stops.. We would all still be farming for ourselves in bumfuck idaho if we didn’t give a shit.
But when we apply that to the current day economy it looks like balls, because old mates like uber makes it virtually impossible to achieve much more than average. It seems like it’s more a trickle down franchise system, where contractors earn fuck all and the ubers of the world are the aspirational ones getting ahead..
I still believe the ol sole trader trying to make a good living by been inventive is the back bone of Australia.. But that’s getting harder all the time..

 

[leitch]

Yeah look, I guess I just don’t buy Nerfs assertion that “people buying things = trickle down works”, when as you say the reality is wealth inequality and job insecurity (among plenty of other negatives) are increasing, and the only thing that has demonstrably led to direct improvements for people across the board in the last ~50 years has been the achievements of labour organisations/unions in securing better wages and better conditions over time, which capital has consistently resisted.

Yes people “should” be aspirational (though we shouldn’t define what’s worthy of aspiring to), but we can’t pretend that the people who we demonise for “not being aspirational enough” (which is really just thinly veiled “not working hard enough”) are not also the people who are getting shit on constantly no matter how hard they work.

Anyway, that’s hardly scratching the surface. My comment was more that this thread is pointless because there’s no conversation. Nerf just comes by once every six weeks, drops some neoliberal BS masquerading as intellectual musings and then disappears again without actually engaging the topic.

 

[Freediver]

It's got absolutely nothing to do with aspiration.
It's the theory that making rich people richer helps poor people.

 

[Nerf Herder]

I think we can largely agree that the Nerfonomics thread is basically just a place for old mate to jerk off into a mirror, no?

Sure is
https://images.app.goo.gl/fPQbznQRRTb5A4A48

As I said ... think broader

 

[Flow-Rider]

Sure is
https://images.app.goo.gl/fPQbznQRRTb5A4A48

As I said ... think broader

 

[Nerf Herder]

@Flow-Rider ... How do you do that ... meh

Just to dig a deeper hole ...

trickle down works ... it just doesnt work for all ... sure ... does that make it better for you ?? Does that make what I wrote wrong ??? explain why, by using my examples.

Think broader, because to say trickle down doesnt work in totality is absolutely wrong and way to narrow ... which is what I'm getting accused off.

That said, who said capitalism or socialism or what ever other ism works for all or has to work for all ??

what are the alternatives ?? where are your examples of how this has worked ? share your ideas ... why get offended on RB of all places and revert to negatives. meh ... I anticipate articles and arguments using Nordic economies. Cool.

@leitch ... point taken ... time is a resource I wish I had more of ... see above ... BTW far from NeoConservative.

to the other post about the Gig Economy ... I personally dont get it ... but I meant to post this several pages back ... I see the Gig economy starts with a choice ... thats going to trigger a few I'm sure.

in the positive ... somebody is trading flexibility for time (work/life balance initially)
In the negative ... some poor bastard cant get enough hours so pedals around somebody's food or delivers somebody's drugs (see recent article in print media re drug dealers using Airtasker to deliver shipments unknown)

Are you in the Gig economy ... what do you do ??? is it worth your while ??? if not why do you do it ?? choice

The lucky make the choice ... the unlucky sometimes have 'no' choice. I personally dont believe the no choice bit. Happy for you to outline several examples (real or fictious) and I'll attempt to ID where the choice was.

warning may not answer for several weeks ... I work for a living.

 

[hifiandmtb]

It's got absolutely nothing to do with aspiration.
It's the theory that making rich people richer helps poor people.

@Nerf Herder, are you subscribing to the true definition of trickle down economics or not?

Trickle-down economics, also called trickle-down theory, refers to the economic proposition that taxes on businesses and the wealthy in society should be reduced as a means to stimulate business investment in the short term and benefit society at large in the long term.

In the true sense of the definition, it's proven to be a failure. Can you not see this?

 

[SummitFever]

For the increasingly poor middle class, trickle down does occur (eg they spend their tax cuts) but for the top 1% that have accumulated something in the order of 90% of global wealth by definition there must be little or no trickle down. To accumulate that amount of wealth you must by definition not be trickling down.

What we see is trickle up. Tax cuts to those that are already spending all of their income will almost certainly flow up as they spend all of their income.

 

[Freediver]

For the increasingly poor middle class, trickle down does occur (eg they spend their tax cuts) but for the top 1% that have accumulated something in the order of 90% of global wealth by definition there must be little or no trickle down. To accumulate that amount of wealth you must by definition not be trickling down.

What we see is trickle up. Tax cuts to those that are already spending all of their income will almost certainly flow up as they spend all of their income.

Tax cuts for the underprilidged are not part of trickle down, it's the wealthy that get the tax breaks. You're just talking about the result of tax cuts for everyone.

 

[Litenbror]

Tax cuts for the underprilidged are not part of trickle down, it's the wealthy that get the tax breaks. You're just talking about the result of tax cuts for everyone.

Yes but this needs to be part of the discussion re trickle down because all the evidence is against trickle down being good for the economy but evidence for tax cuts for the low and middle class demonstrate the money gets put to use in the economy rather than just being locked up.

 

[Flow-Rider]

@Flow-Rider ... How do you do that ... meh

Some gifs don't seem to automate on this site but test them in the preview part, there is a share link on the one you posted, download, drop and drag onto your post or use the links on the gif sites.

I'm not wealthy but I wish I was as I could go riding all day without a worry, but a lot of people look at the end result of wealth and not how the person got there.

 

[Freediver]

@Flow-Rider ... How do you do that ... meh

Just to dig a deeper hole ...

trickle down works ... it just doesnt work for all ... sure ... does that make it better for you ?? Does that make what I wrote wrong ??? explain why, by using my examples.

Think broader, because to say trickle down doesnt work in totality is absolutely wrong and way to narrow ... which is what I'm getting accused off.

That said, who said capitalism or socialism or what ever other ism works for all or has to work for all ??

what are the alternatives ?? where are your examples of how this has worked ? share your ideas ... why get offended on RB of all places and revert to negatives. meh ... I anticipate articles and arguments using Nordic economies. Cool.

@leitch ... point taken ... time is a resource I wish I had more of ... see above ... BTW far from NeoConservative.

to the other post about the Gig Economy ... I personally dont get it ... but I meant to post this several pages back ... I see the Gig economy starts with a choice ... thats going to trigger a few I'm sure.

in the positive ... somebody is trading flexibility for time (work/life balance initially)
In the negative ... some poor bastard cant get enough hours so pedals around somebody's food or delivers somebody's drugs (see recent article in print media re drug dealers using Airtasker to deliver shipments unknown)

Are you in the Gig economy ... what do you do ??? is it worth your while ??? if not why do you do it ?? choice

The lucky make the choice ... the unlucky sometimes have 'no' choice. I personally dont believe the no choice bit. Happy for you to outline several examples (real or fictious) and I'll attempt to ID where the choice was.

warning may not answer for several weeks ... I work for a living.

Ok let's start this.
Think broader, because to say trickle down doesnt work in totality is absolutely wrong and way to narrow. No it's not. Every example of trickle down economics leads to the wealthy accumulating more and the divide between rich and poor growing. We have seen it with every Liberal govt. since Fraser.

who said capitalism or socialism or what ever other ism works for all or has to work for all. Strawman anybody? When somebody attacks a proposition you have made replying back with an attack on a position that wasn't made is not even debating, it's showing ignorance of the topic. Nobody was promoting any of the "isms" you mentioned as an argument against trickle down economics.

BTW far from NeoConservative. yet you spruik their position.

what are the alternatives? A progressive tax system where those who benefit most from society contribute the most. A tax system that gives the government money to spend on roads and hospitals without privatising them. A system that can pay for a decent education for our kids. Governments spending money on the people that is raised through a fair tax system will always provide more jobs that any wealthy individual buying a second holiday house in the Bahamas will.

I see the Gig economy starts with a choice ... thats going to trigger a few I'm sure. For a rare few that may be the case but for most it's an attempt to get by and not a very god one. Gig economy is a way for companies to undermine hard fought for wages and conditions. When the government manages the economy to have around 5% unemployment so that we have reduced pressure on wage growth many are left without jobs and are forced to do whatever they can to put food on their table. Have you not heard about the people earning less than minimum wage driving Ubers or delivering for deliveroo.

I personally dont believe the no choice bit. That could only be because you have blinkers on and come from a privileged position.

warning may not answer for several weeks ... I work for a living. Straight from the conservatives playbook "I work for a living" translates to "fuck any cunt with less than me, they don't deserve it".

You really sound like one of the Liberal voters that bang on about Liberals being "better for the economy" but have no idea about how the economy actually works and the consequences of that.

 

[Kerplunk]

Another reason dribble down doesn’t work is any benefit given to the rich is added to their cash pile rather than been spent.. While if you gave the same benefit directly to the lower paid they would put it through the economy almost straight away..
Might as well just bypass the trickle bit..

 

[Calvin27]

The lucky make the choice ... the unlucky sometimes have 'no' choice. I personally dont believe the no choice bit. Happy for you to outline several examples (real or fictious) and I'll attempt to ID where the choice was.

The impact of a system on individual ability to have 'choice' can basically be observed between nations. There are always choices but it's the cumulative effect that makes a difference. A good example would be a minimum wage worker who gets sick in USA vs Australia. The former will likely get bankrupt by the user pays system. The later will fall into a safety net and has better choices to recover from the situation.

In terms of dribble down economics, it is easily disproven if you understand the economic concept of marginal benefit and/or economic multipliers.

 

[Nerf Herder]

@Nerf Herder, are you subscribing to the true definition of trickle down economics or not?



In the true sense of the definition, it's proven to be a failure. Can you not see this?

I think broadly I am on topic ... although I am definitely looking at wealth effect which I see is the targetted outcome of Trickle Down.

If you have information highlighting that Tax reductions havent coincided with increased Business investment and or jobs creation, and or increase in disposable income that have lead to a rise in small service based businesses or the wealth effects I'm focusing on then we are jumping around and arguing different points.

I'm not seeking to justify or condemn resource consolidation at the top or income / opportunity inequality at the bottom ... but more focused on the benefits produced in the middle and it is these benefits that have trickled down to create more jobs.

Now apologies ... I haven't had time to read all the above in completeness ... but the aim here is to share info.

Happy for you to counter my points ... but show me the money ... for the one above ... show me where a progressive tax system (which is still what we have BTW) has created more prosperity ... specifically created more jobs and created MORE equality ??? I bet thats going to be hard to find. but happy to be wrong and interested to read.

As FYI ... this isnt meant to be a political thread ... but obviously Politicis and Economics can go hand in hand. if you look back several pages to where this Trickle Down discussion started ... the reshaping of my views originated from a discussion with a "family friend" who is a political consultant for the LEFT ... Greens and more recently Labour.

Look further back and you will find ... the aim of this thread is to track my forecasting ... right now ... I am grappling with where unemployment will be long term as I believe fundamentals are still the same pre vs post COVID understanding COVID induced government impacts. I'm attempting to reshape and or test my current economic views ... ie ... am I wrong and long term unemployment is going to be brutal ... above trickle down is related to my increasing view that corporate redundancies are inevitable ... which will impact service businesses ... MY BUSINESS ... and therefore my forecast.

None of what I am sharing is related to my political views ... dick heads lololololz ... fuck you people are quick to judge.

My way of understanding and problems solving has always been to understand the counter view and judge appropriatness to change current views from there.

Will read remaining later ... thanks for your involvement BTW ... dick heads lololololz

 

[hifiandmtb]

You don't subscribe to the true definition of trickle down economics then.

You simply choose to reframe the term.