Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Mythbusters: Trickle down – busted
Share:
by YankeeJim | December 11, 2010 at 07:48 am
197 views | 2 Recommendations | 10 comments
Photos
I would love to have trickle down economic theory put before Mythbusters, but of course, these guys stay within the realm of physical science mostly.
Trickle down
“(economics) Describing the theory that financial benefits given to the wealthy will somehow be passed down to the poor”
The operative word here is “somehow.” If you can’t describe precisely “how,” then the theory is bogus.
If wealthy individuals invest in manufacturing America, whereby they are providing capital for product design and development that results in significant production of world-class products being made in America, by American companies, then, that sort of investment trickle is valuable. Yet, individuals with a lot of money have many options about what to do with it. Therefore, government tax policy must be configured such that they are encouraged to make investments in things that optimize benefits for American businesses and their workers.
It should not be left to by-guess-and-by-golly economics that we are experiencing now.
Anyway, I love Mythbusters and I am glad to see them hooking up with the President for another successful program. Those guys are creating jobs in Alameda California at the old Alameda Naval Air Station that was closed due to bad representation from Congressman Ron Dellums.
“Obama's 'Mythbusters' episode draws big ratings
Say what you want about President Obama, but the guy can pull in some ratings.
The President made a guest appearance on the Wednesday, December 8 episode of the show and more than 2 million people tuned in to check it out. As we noted earlier, President Obama asked the mythbusting duo to solve the legend of Archimedes' solar ray, which was storied to be one serious weapon.
Although the team had handled such a fiery mission twice before, this time the President wanted them to examine the myth by considering manpower.
With that many people tuning in, the episode landed in the No. 1 spot among cable primetime programs that night among men 25 to 54 and men 18 to 34.”
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
YankeeJim
Arlington, Virginia, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (10)
at 08:06 on December 11th, 2010
By-guess-and-by-golly economics -- "guess
c.1300, gessen "to estimate, appraise," originally "take aim," probably from Scand. (cf. Middle Danish gitse, getze "to guess," O.N. geta "guess, get"), possibly infl. by M.Du. gessen, M.L.G.gissen "to guess," all from P.Gmc. *getiskanan "to get" (see move). Sense evolution is from "to get," to "to take aim at," to "to estimate." U.S. sense of "calculate, recon" is true to the oldest Eng. meaning. Spelling with gu- is late 16c., sometimes attributed to Caxton and his early experience as a printer in Bruges. Guesswork is from 1725. Guesstimate is 1934, coined by statisticians, blendingguess and estimate."
at 12:11 on December 11th, 2010
I always loved the other moniker for this one, Jim, 'voodoo economics', quite appropriate since it would take some form of other worldly motion, i.e. sorcery/magic, to make it work!
Oddly enough, the term was coined by former President George H. W. Bush.
at 14:23 on December 11th, 2010
Yes, he also came up with "A new world order."
I wrote a play on words for an advertisement for a software product: It's a new world, order now! Ha!
at 13:30 on December 11th, 2010
Investing in production/manufacturing/jobs is no different than investing in the stock market. When the environment is hostile the money goes elsewhere. Beginning back in the early '80's the manufacturing environment has become ever increasingly hostile, not only for established employers but especially for new manufacturing start ups. Across America there are towns, cities, with nothing but the skeletal remains of a once prosperous industry lost to inability to compete, or moved to a country with cheaper employment, material and distribution costs. It is very telling when a company can start up overseas, produce a product, pay the cost to ship it 3 thousand miles across an ocean, pay the cost to distribute by train and truck that product throughout the US and still sell cheaper and profit more than they can produce and distribute in the US.
at 14:25 on December 11th, 2010
"Investing in production/manufacturing/jobs is no different than investing in the stock market." It is different. Many stocks have no bearing on American employment and as the recent crash has proven, financial investments in real estate paper can be phoney balogne.
at 16:15 on December 11th, 2010
It isn't any different in terms of "market environment" which I am speaking of. Anyone can make exceptions of "phony baloney" but they are not the rule. They are exceptions to the rule. Money goes where it will gather the greatest return. The more that return is pinched down on, the more the money will go elsewhere. Governments want to "control" the economy, yet want to pass legislation that is counter to and in spite of that reality. Today the US is not a good investment vis a vie the global free market. The American government and the American worker are going to have to make some adjustments in their level of expectation. Until they do, many jobs will be going elsewhere. The blame game. That ain't going to cut it. The nuclear urban family, every child with his or her own house and two cars in the garage has passed. That social expectation is no longer going to be achievable for the majority. Those who can make the adjustment, pool their resource needs and incomes will be the new middle class. A new neo-merchant class so to speak.
at 17:20 on December 11th, 2010
Lower expectations?
Ooh, now this is interesting and deserves some thought.
"Those who can make the adjustment, pool their resource needs and incomes will be the new middle class. A new neo-merchant class so to speak."
at 16:32 on December 11th, 2010
None of you are understanding the concept of 'trickle down economics'. This concept is exactly what President Obama is trying to follow now. The rich don't actually rule or control the economic health of a capitalist society. That is a false assumption. The actually driving force is the largest force. The main stream. The largest consumer base. Not the rich. President Clinton knew this. So does President Obama ( Karen ). If you want to see to economy expand, and the unemployment rate fall, give the largest class of consumer the impetus to spend and believe in the 'American Dream' again.
1
at 17:22 on December 11th, 2010
" The rich don't actually rule or control the economic health of a capitalist society."
at 18:17 on December 11th, 2010
Those who don't understand are those who use terms like trickle down economics. There is no such economic system as trickle down economics. It's nothing more than a buzz word to depreciate existing political socio-economic initiatives for partisan purposes. These same people blame the government for the economy and employment or they think the politics of redistributive socio-economic initiatives will correct the evils of a free market. Which is another misnomer, because if you can't pay you can't play and there ain't nothing free about it. Every government in the world has their hand in the game seeking the best resolution for their own interests whether they are buying or selling and all nations regulate accordingly.