Quote:
Originally posted by hammer4all
Use some freakin' common sense people. Give $1000 to a poor person who can barely get by and give $1000 to a millionaire. Who do you think is more likely to spend it and thus stimulate the economy? There is a reason why the rich and well-to-do are pushing this "trickle down" idea and it's not because they think it will help the poor... 
|
Poor person would spend the money no doubt, but the only way they would further benefit the economy is by their cigarette addiction or booze. By saying that I am in no way asserting all "poor people" are black death smoking cancer heads or booze hounds, I'm just saying that food to my knowledge is not taxed, what else are they going to spend it on that will generate revenue?
When a rich person invests do they not get taxed on their returns? Or at the very least they'll piss it away on a flat screen for their bathroom. Who knows maybe they will put the money towards at extra upgrade at the Mercedes dealership, bottomline is they will be redistributing money right back into the economy.
Also for all you "yeah but" anti-Bush economists who constantly bitch about job lose. On top of the good market and job growth from Nov 2002 Until just recently when it slowed up, the unemployment rate was below the Ten year average for the last 30 years (70-80, 80-90, 90-00).