Failed GOP Economics - What Is The Cause?

Failed GOP Economics - What Is The Cause?

  • They were never meant to be a success, other than for the wealthy.

  • They just need another 40 years or so, it will be fine - just let them keep at it...

  • The [Media, Immigrants, Liberals, Lizard people - pick one or all] is at fault.

  • They are working just fine, you are just too stupid to notice/realize it.

  • I am a raging moron.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Newell Steamer

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2014
6,894
8
0
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...xplain-why-their-economic-ideas-keep-failing/

As Brian Beutler noted afterward, that is exactly what Democrats will be saying next year. So how did Fiorina respond? She told the story of a woman she met who worries about her economic situation, then said, “Yes, problems have gotten much worse under Democrats,” which is the opposite of the truth, then went on to decry how government has been “crushing the engine of economic growth for a very long time.”

In other words, she didn’t answer the question. But its essence is this. The Republican candidates all propose variations on the same theme, which is that the way to boost the economy is to cut taxes and scale back government regulation of business. In other words, here’s the plan all the Republicans agree on:

1) Cut taxes, particularly for the wealthy.

2) Scale back regulations on business.

3) Watch the economy boom.

The trouble is that we’ve been testing their theory for some time now, and it isn’t holding up well.

It doesn't take a Washington Post Opinion article, nor a degree in Rocket Surgery, to realize GOP Economics just don't work.

But Republicans still haven’t answered the basic question: Why does the Republican theory about what moves the economy keep failing? Something tells me they never will.

Forget about the last sentence, let's focus on the bold.

What is the cause of failed GOP Economics?
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,432
16,935
136
Because they're right in a theoretical way but that's a society we don't want to live in like we had in 1920 or like China currently has. What good is having a job with long term stability if it only pays $200 per month without benefits?
 
Last edited:

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,108
1,575
126
The problem is simple and quite obvious. The idea is that if you give rich people more money then they'll invest that money back into society. Unfortunately the reality that the GOP fails to realize (they probably do realize but I'll hope against logic that they're not really as shitty as they seem) is that rich people don't invest money if it won't make them more money. And because they're rich, they've probably already invested the max amount they feel is right. So that money we give them back doesn't go into society, it goes into stocks or bonds or bank accounts. Virtually the whole of economic proof shows that trickle down fails and that the exact opposite actually functions, but the right wing will ideologically hold on to their view until the world ends ... probably thanks to the economic collapse they have a heavy hand in.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,603
29,676
136
We haven't tried True Conservative® policies yet. That's the problem.
 

Dannar26

Senior member
Mar 13, 2012
754
142
106
What should we do then?

Perhaps it's all anecdotal, but after working in the banking/finance industry for awhile, it's apparent to me that many "rich" people are more akin to old dragons sleeping atop a horde of treasure. If anything should rouse them from their ignorant slumber, they would immediately dispense wrath in all directions over their missing three cents or bank inactivity fee. And don't even get me started about financial advisors...

But I'm not convinced we should just tax them into oblivion either. Surely there's a way we don't penalize people who have (I'm not saying all the rich are thus) worked their way to a modest war chest.

To me, the real danger is upping taxes on those savvy with their money such that it would trickle down (har) to the middle classes who can't really bear more taxation.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,111
7,637
136
The problem is simple and quite obvious. The idea is that if you give rich people more money then they'll invest that money back into society. Unfortunately the reality that the GOP fails to realize (they probably do realize but I'll hope against logic that they're not really as shitty as they seem) is that rich people don't invest money if it won't make them more money. And because they're rich, they've probably already invested the max amount they feel is right. So that money we give them back doesn't go into society, it goes into stocks or bonds or bank accounts. Virtually the whole of economic proof shows that trickle down fails and that the exact opposite actually functions, but the right wing will ideologically hold on to their view until the world ends ... probably thanks to the economic collapse they have a heavy hand in.

And a big chunk of that money that they have absolutely no use for goes toward continually corrupting our politicians so as to ensure that the rigged game they bought for themselves is sustained in perpetuity.

In this game, the winner owns everything, including people.

Right back to those good old days from which our forefathers migrated to America to get away from. How ironic it is that the form of gov't our forefathers created to prevent that which they despised has now been perverted into being exactly that and worse.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,365
8,475
126
Because they're right in a theoretical way but that's a society we don't want to live in like we had in 1920 or like China currently has. What good is having a job with long term stability if it only pays $200 per month without benefits?

they're not even right in a theoretical way. they're trying to apply rules that work for individuals and for individual firms to the entire economy, and it simply doesn't work that way.

further, they all seem to think we're still on the gold standard. they have not a single clue about the relationship of the debt, the deficit, money, and the economy. not a one.

not that the democrats largely do either, but they're not typically hammering on the first two as an issue.
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
Because they ether have a shallow view of how the economy works, or they know how it works and want to make the rich much richer, and poor poorer.
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
The main goal of "trickle down" is to give the wealthy more money. That was the primary goal. The "side effect" was that hopefully some rained down on us plebs. Everyone lapped it up.
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,172
137
106
Your premise is completely wrong. Republicans have NOT cut taxes, except perhaps for the extreme wealthy. But tax cuts only for the 1% is NOT what they run on. And they have done nothing to curb the bureaucracy. They have increased taxes at every turn, usually via indirect methods. For example, they allow massive budget deficits which increase government debt which increases the money supply which fuels bubbles such as housing and healthcare and college tuition. So they do not actually implement the policies you are claiming have failed.

The reason republicans have failed is because they refuse to take a HARD stance on illegal immigration, welfare, etc. There is no solution as long as they are willing to compromise by continuing to fund single mothers so they can continue screwing the wrong guys and producing hordes of disobedient little hellions who infest the schools and drag down the education for everyone. Republicans have drifted so far from the party of personal responsibility and fiscal conservatism. Witness the result: half a trillion a year TAKEN at gunpoint from responsible married couples (who tend to make more money and therefore pay higher taxes) and GIVEN to the sluts so they can keep on gettin it on and letting the welfare state pay for it. That crap stops, or it ends this nation, plain and simple.
 
Last edited:

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,745
4,563
136
Because they're right in a theoretical way but that's a society we don't want to live in like we had in 1920 or like China currently has. What good is having a job with long term stability if it only pays $200 per month without benefits?

Think of the stock holders. Will someone PLEASE think of the stock holders?! :'(
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
The problem is simple and quite obvious. The idea is that if you give rich people more money then they'll invest that money back into society. Unfortunately the reality that the GOP fails to realize (they probably do realize but I'll hope against logic that they're not really as shitty as they seem) is that rich people don't invest money if it won't make them more money. And because they're rich, they've probably already invested the max amount they feel is right. So that money we give them back doesn't go into society, it goes into stocks or bonds or bank accounts. Virtually the whole of economic proof shows that trickle down fails and that the exact opposite actually functions, but the right wing will ideologically hold on to their view until the world ends ... probably thanks to the economic collapse they have a heavy hand in.
You're sooooo close.
You missed one thing that Reagan missed: rich people can invest in the economy - just not necessarily the U.S. economy. "Hey, we've got an extra billion dollars. Let's build a new manufacturing plant... in <foreign country.>"
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,315
1,215
126
The main goal of "trickle down" is to give the wealthy more money. That was the primary goal. The "side effect" was that hopefully some rained down on us plebs. Everyone lapped it up.

True dat.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,338
402
126
Because they're right in a theoretical way but that's a society we don't want to live in like we had in 1920 or like China currently has. What good is having a job with long term stability if it only pays $200 per month without benefits?

The only reason we aren't like China now is because we don't have to settle trade honestly as the world reserve currency, we can print money and it goes into overseas assets instead of inflating the domestic money supply due to the artificial demand of the petrodollar. Believing that can go on forever is like those people who believed the sun would never set on the British Empire. It's a complete fantasy.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
The irony of their trickle down policies is that they are starting to kill off their middle aged idiot whitey base.