cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Tiny number of wealthy propping-up the scroungers !
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
In The Know JK2006 wrote:
I don't agree though I love the quote. I think Trickle Down often does work.

Like the great benefactors of the Victorian era ... Sir Titus Salt and Lord Lever for example.

Without them the peasants would still be living in hovels.

They brought schools, hospitals, parks, and education for the masses
- and the peasants then were grateful ... 100,000 lined the route for Salt's funeral.
PB JK2006 wrote:
I don't agree though I love the quote. I think Trickle Down often does work. Encourage people like Bill Gates and Bruce Springsteen and millions will benefit.

Chicken and egg?

People need to work to earn money first.
JK2006 I don't agree though I love the quote. I think Trickle Down often does work. Encourage people like Bill Gates and Bruce Springsteen and millions will benefit.
wjlmarsh comrade hedda wrote:
For the resident Ayn Rand fanatic:



Not heard the quote nor any rebuttal to the tickle down nonsense promoted Thatcher / Reagan era and probably many other times as well.

No doubt creating institutions that have created money like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and so on have created a trickle down effect for sure and worked well, at other times a dismissal failure. (Not necessarily wrong at the out set just sometimes hijacked in mid stream by a dictator and such like).

But certainly now with austerity and in the other eras major distributions of cash and home assets to the less fortunate with monitoring, helpful assistance, education (like alternative lifestyle to drug addiction) and considerate security like in tower blocks to prevent the hoodlums selling drugs etc. Ensure things run well. So from the ground up would be 100% stimulation to the economy (poorer people and areas of need have no choice but to spend the money 100%) whereas often the rich getting more in tax breaks etc just means that the extra goes into their assets like bank accounts as the rich have no further need to spend more thus tickling no where. (Aside from the main projects mentioned and such like. )
In The Know <<< passed through the poor fellow's hands >>>


Yes, we've seen Labour poor money down the drain TOO many times !