Does President Obama believe in Trickle Down Economics?

[Immanuel]

I've been thinking about the Economic Spending Bill facetiously named The Economic Stimulus Bill and I began to realize that what President Obama is doing is poor a trillion dollars into the economy from the top and expecting it to trickle down to the poor people.

I don't know where every dime of the spending bill is going but an aweful lot of it seems to be going to the people at the top.

It is funny that Liberals always laugh at trickle down economists.

But, be truthful here, is that not what this bill is all about?

Are they laughing at President Obama yet?

Immie

[Psychoblues]

No. He recognises that as the Republican myth that it is.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

No. He recognises that as the Republican myth that it is.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

Okay, then here is a test, if it is a myth that this is nothing more than a spending bill, what is different between this bill and a spending bill?

I'm sorry, but I can't tell the difference.

Immie

[Psychoblues]

If a "test" is what you're advocating then you need to spell out your parameters including the facts.



Okay, then here is a test, if it is a myth that this is nothing more than a spending bill, what is different between this bill and a spending bill?

I'm sorry, but I can't tell the difference.

Immie

Perhaps because you can't formulate them is the source of your confusion?!?!!??!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

Okay, let me make this as plain as can be (and open it to everyone on site) what is the difference between The Economic Stimulus Bill and a governmental spending bill?

Anyone know?

Immie

[Psychoblues]

Could you be more specific, Immie? Or are you just trying to stir up some reichwing shit that you seem to be prone to appreciating?!?!?!?!?!????!??!?



Okay, let me make this as plain as can be (and open it to everyone on site) what is the difference between The Economic Stimulus Bill and a governmental spending bill?

Anyone know?

Immie

The macro economy is something that very few understand and for which many that do have differing philiosphies. Have you ever considered a college level course or possibly some on hands work in a brokerage?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

Could you be more specific, Immie? Or are you just trying to stir up some reichwing shit that you seem to be prone to appreciating?!?!?!?!?!????!??!?




The macro economy is something that very few understand and for which many that do have differing philiosphies. Have you ever considered a college level course or possibly some on hands work in a brokerage?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

I've had college economics courses. My degree is in finance so I have had more than my share. One could say I am lacking in college level courses on political science though. I still don't see a difference between this bill and a spending bill, but I should know more than to seek a straight answer from you. :D So moving on... anyone else?

Immie

[Psychoblues]

Cool!!!!!!!!!! So, I can assume that your juvenile intro into this conversation is only in jest and not to be taken seriously?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!



I've had college economics courses. My degree is in finance so I have had more than my share. One could say I am lacking in college level courses on political science though. I still don't see a difference between this bill and a spending bill, but I should know more than to seek a straight answer from you. :D So moving on... anyone else?

Immie

Give 'em hell, cowgirl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

Cool!!!!!!!!!! So, I can assume that your juvenile intro into this conversation is only in jest and not to be taken seriously?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!




Give 'em hell, cowgirl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

That is cowboy to you, sir!

And no, first it is an honest question and second it was by no means juvenile nor was it in jest.

It is an honest question, does President Obama believe in Trickle Down Economics based upon the spending bill he is pushing through Congress in the first month of his Administration?

Immie

[Psychoblues]

And my answer is still, NO. If you have conflicting information I would like for you to share it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




That is cowboy to you, sir!

And no, first it is an honest question and second it was by no means juvenile nor was it in jest.

It is an honest question, does President Obama believe in Trickle Down Economics based upon the spending bill he is pushing through Congress in the first month of his Administration?

Immie

You may be a cowboy but you'll always be a cowgirl to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And quite possibly a juvenile as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

And my answer is still, NO.

Oh, my Lord, a straight answer from you!

I think I must be the first person in the history of dp.com that can claim to have received a straight answer from pb. :lol:

Now, I would respectfully ask you to explain your answer as I am curious to know why you don't think he does and why you don't think this is a spending bill, but then I would probably be pushing my luck.

I'll pass along a Busch even though it is a tad bit early anyway. Here it comes down the bar!

Immie

[PostmodernProphet]

since 80% of his money ends up in the hands of government agencies I think it could better be characterized as Stagnant Pond economics......

[Psychoblues]

Actually, within commonly accepted economic principles 100% of the jimmy jamm jamm ends up in the governments hands, pimp.



since 80% of his money ends up in the hands of government agencies I think it could better be characterized as Stagnant Pond economics......

Which theory are you reading?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!??! Seriously, I haven't seen the one you are referring to?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

since 80% of his money ends up in the hands of government agencies I think it could better be characterized as Stagnant Pond economics......


Actually, within commonly accepted economic principles 100% of the jimmy jamm jamm ends up in the governments hands, pimp.




Which theory are you reading?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!??! Seriously, I haven't seen the one you are referring to?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

Actually, if what I have read much of it does go to government agencies to be spent on energy saving ideas and other features. However, I am sure that money will then be spent in the corporate world. How much of it will go to large corporations who bid on contracts? Not to say that this is one of the corporations that will win bids, but does the name Halliburton ring a bell?

These funds won't be going to the little people. They will go to the top rungs of the ladder and Voila! trickle down... hopefully.

Will any of it go to Welfare? Raises for Social Security recipients?

Thus my question, does he believe in trickle down economics or not?

Immie

[Psychoblues]

I think that is a shallow observation much akin to the limpdick theory.


Actually, if what I have read much of it does go to government agencies to be spent on energy saving ideas and other features. However, I am sure that money will then be spent in the corporate world. How much of it will go to large corporations who bid on contracts? Not to say that this is one of the corporations that will win bids, but does the name Halliburton ring a bell?

These funds won't be going to the little people. They will go to the top rungs of the ladder and Voila! trickle down... hopefully.

Will any of it go to Welfare? Raises for Social Security recipients?

Thus my question, does he believe in trickle down economics or not?

Immie

Have you ever read any comprehensive economic theories and what they might represent in the big picture, immie?!?!???!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!

But, they're all theories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one knows for certain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

I think that is a shallow observation much akin to the limpdick theory.



Have you ever read any comprehensive economic theories and what they might represent in the big picture, immie?!?!???!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!

But, they're all theories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one knows for certain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

I didn't say anyone knows for certain. I'm still trying to figure out how this plan is different from a spending bill. It seems no one here knows either at least no one who has read the beginnings of this thread.

I'm hopeful someone will come along and give an intelligent reply. PMP tried but he didn't explain the difference.

Immie

[Psychoblues]

The implication of your title indicates a negative attitude towards the President, Immie.



I didn't say anyone knows for certain. I'm still trying to figure out how this plan is different from a spending bill. It seems no one here knows either at least no one who has read the beginnings of this thread.

I'm hopeful someone will come along and give an intelligent reply. PMP tried but he didn't explain the difference.

Immie

I apologize if I somehow misinterpreted it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can I offer you an apology drink, but only for entertainment purposes?!?!?!?!?!?!?!???!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

The implication of your title indicates a negative attitude towards the President, Immie.




I apologize if I somehow misinterpreted it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can I offer you an apology drink, but only for entertainment purposes?!?!?!?!?!?!?!???!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

No apology necessary and sure pass along the drink.

Now, if I believe in the theory of Trickle Down Economics, why would it be a negative attitude towards the President?

Rather, if anything, it would be a negative attitude towards liberals who laugh at me for thinking the best way to stimulate the economy is to get money into the hands of those who can afford to spend it... wouldn't it? :)

But, actually, I don't have a negative attitude towards liberals either. I think this plan is a trickle down economics plan. I would like to know what others think.

Immie

[Psychoblues]

I think it is a "trickle up" theory as the President intends and has spoken at length about.



No apology necessary and sure pass along the drink.

Now, if I believe in the theory of Trickle Down Economics, why would it be a negative attitude towards the President?

Rather, if anything, it would be a negative attitude towards liberals who laugh at me for thinking the best way to stimulate the economy is to get money into the hands of those who can afford to spend it... wouldn't it? :)

But, actually, I don't have a negative attitude towards liberals either. I think this plan is a trickle down economics plan. I would like to know what others think.

Immie

But, I've been taken in by liars in the past and perhaps you can give me good reason to believe that I've been taken in by another in this case.

Carry on, my friend!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Immanuel]

I think it is a "trickle up" theory as the President intends and has spoken at length about.




But, I've been taken in by liars in the past and perhaps you can give me good reason to believe that I've been taken in by another in this case.

Carry on, my friend!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

Well, the way I see it is that the funds will be given to governmental agencies to spend, aka a spending bill, on things like energy savings and the likes. In order for the government to spend those funds, they will take bids from contractors, right? Who do you think will win those bids... Mary's Sue's Solar Heating or Halliburton who has the ability to underbid everyone else and then bill additional costs elsewhere?

As I asked, will any of those funds go to Welfare recipients or Social Security recipients? These people would be the true poor. Will they see any of these funds?

Immie

[Psychoblues]

I'm glad to see your concern for the welfare recipients and the social security annuitants, Immie.



Well, the way I see it is that the funds will be given to governmental agencies to spend, aka a spending bill, on things like energy savings and the likes. In order for the government to spend those funds, they will take bids from contractors, right? Who do you think will win those bids... Mary's Sue's Solar Heating or Halliburton who has the ability to underbid everyone else and then bill additional costs elsewhere?

As I asked, will any of those funds go to Welfare recipients or Social Security recipients? These people would be the true poor. Will they see any of these funds?

Immie

One way or another, I suspect they will benefit from expanded wealth of those being bailed out. A rising tide floats all ships, don't you know?!?!?!?!!?!?!??!?!?!?

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[PostmodernProphet]

Actually, within commonly accepted economic principles 100% of the jimmy jamm jamm ends up in the governments hands, pimp.

I expect you meant that under the goals of Democratic government, 100% of money ends up in government hands.....

[Psychoblues]

I expect that you don't understand the concept of national economics in even a shallow manner, pimp.



I expect you meant that under the goals of Democratic government, 100% of money ends up in government hands.....

What's that dribbling, trickling, down your chin?!?!?!???!?!?!???!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[PostmodernProphet]

PMP tried but he didn't explain the difference

I think an important difference is what type of job will be stimulated.....are we talking about a one shot job, such as building a bridge?.....a job that will go away once the bridge is built?....a job working in a public service, which will go away as soon as the money runs out?...is it better to stimulate the creation of a job building widgets that will be around so long as people want to buy widgets?......

[PostmodernProphet]

What's that dribbling, trickling, down your chin?!?!?!???!?!?!???!


looks like psychotic blue blood to me......

[Psychoblues]

Really?



looks like psychotic blue blood to me......

And what was that trickling down your chin, pimp?!?!?!?!?!??!??!?!??!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[PostmodernProphet]

Really?




And what was that trickling down your chin, pimp?!?!?!?!?!??!??!?!??!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

you can't expect me to rip your posts to shreds and not leave a little blood somewhere, Psych.....

[Immanuel]

I'm glad to see your concern for the welfare recipients and the social security annuitants, Immie.




One way or another, I suspect they will benefit from expanded wealth of those being bailed out. A rising tide floats all ships, don't you know?!?!?!?!!?!?!??!?!?!?

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

Still sounds more like Trickle Down rather than Flood the Basement economics.


I think an important difference is what type of job will be stimulated.....are we talking about a one shot job, such as building a bridge?.....a job that will go away once the bridge is built?....a job working in a public service, which will go away as soon as the money runs out?...is it better to stimulate the creation of a job building widgets that will be around so long as people want to buy widgets?......

You see that is something that I don't understand. How is the plan supposed to stimulate employment? These funds are going to go to government agencies who will then be required to seek bids from government contractors. These contractors may not need to hire new employees to complete the contracts and will simply boost their sales when fulfilling the contracts.

So, how does this help anyone but the Halliburtons of the world?

Immie

[PostmodernProphet]

Still sounds more like Trickle Down rather than Flood the Basement economics.



You see that is something that I don't understand. How is the plan supposed to stimulate employment? These funds are going to go to government agencies who will then be required to seek bids from government contractors. These contractors may not need to hire new employees to complete the contracts and will simply boost their sales when fulfilling the contracts.

So, how does this help anyone but the Halliburtons of the world?

Immie

well, for example....there is a provision in the bill that authorized the purchase of $50 million in new office furniture.....now, if that furniture was purchased from either Steelcase, Hayworth or Herman Miller (all office furniture companies within 20 miles of me that have laid off employees in the last six months due to falling orders) then that expenditure would stimulate employment.......I also heard that the local fire station is buying a new hook and ladder due to a Homeland Security grant (which was part of an earlier decision, not this stimulus package) and I assume that this fire truck is built somewhere in the US, so that means employment would be stimulated.....

[Immanuel]

well, for example....there is a provision in the bill that authorized the purchase of $50 million in new office furniture.....now, if that furniture was purchased from either Steelcase, Hayworth or Herman Miller (all office furniture companies within 20 miles of me that have laid off employees in the last six months due to falling orders) then that expenditure would stimulate employment.......I also heard that the local fire station is buying a new hook and ladder due to a Homeland Security grant (which was part of an earlier decision, not this stimulus package) and I assume that this fire truck is built somewhere in the US, so that means employment would be stimulated.....

Thanks for your input. I hope that is not just wishful thinking.

Immie