Reaganomics are broken.

Arthur Laffer is an evil, evil man. Not that any of you actually know who Laffer is or what the Laffer curve is, but I'm sure you can Google him to learn more. Allow me to quote some excerpts from a speech he made.

Today, because of Ronald Reagan, the minimum wage in the United States-the minimum wage relative to the average wage in the United States is the lowest it's been in 50 years. It doesn't get any better.

But let me tell you that today, because of Ronald Reagan, the minimum wage in the United States-the minimum wage relative to the average wage in the United States is the lowest it's been in 50 years. It doesn't get any better. As all of you know, the minimum wage is the black teenage unemployment act. It is the guaranteed way of holding the poor, the minorities and the disenfranchised out of the mainstream is if you price their original services too high. Ronald Reagan recognized the deleterious affects of that and really did not allow that minimum wage to rise.

...[Union] membership in the United States has gone from well above 30 percent to down around 12 to 14 percent. [Applause.] That is Ronald Reagan's legacy.

Ronald Reagan wanted free trade more than anything.

...In fact, it was Ronald Reagan, as you all know, who sponsored NAFTA. We couldn't get it passed, but we sponsored NAFTA. It took Bill Clinton to switch and go against his own party, against the unions, to push that through. But Ronald Reagan pushed for NAFTA and pushed for lowering tariffs. Today in the United States, customs duties per dollar of import are the lowest they have been in a thousand years because of Ronald Reagan-literally the lowest.

...[W]ithout Wal-Mart there is no middle class and lower class prosperity in the United States. [Applause.]

In addition to free trade on products and free trade is essential for supply side economics and Reaganomics, in addition to trade on products, is outsourcing. There are some things we do better than Indians, and there are some things they do better than we do. We and they would be foolish in the extreme if we didn't do those things for them that we do better than they do, and they do those things for us that they do better than we do. We win and they win. It's a plus-plus for the world. [Applause.] And just remember, every dollar we spend on outsourcing is spent on U.S. goods or invested back in the U.S. market. That's accounting.

...Outsourcing is not new. Immigration is not new. Not only are these people the life's blood of America, they are, but let me just say to you tonight, on economic terms, the illegal immigrants are also the life's blood of this society. And I'm going to be hard core with you. They produce high quality labor at low cost and they cheat on their taxes. It doesn't get any better.

Not all of us here are 17, and yes, the diarrhea trickle-down theory is faulty. It relies on corporations not being greedy.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not all of us here are 17, and yes, the diarrhea trickle-down theory is faulty. It relies on corporations not being greedy.

And the trickle-up theory is just as faulty. It relies on the government not being political (stupid).

Tax breaks on the middle class: trickle-either-way economics.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Tax breaks on the middle class: trickle-either-way economics.

But then the politicians start redefining the term "middle class" to be whatever they want.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And the trickle-up theory is just as faulty. It relies on the government not being political (stupid).

We should just eliminate the economy all together.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
We should just eliminate the economy all together.

We are on the way to that.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But then the politicians start redefining the term "middle class" to be whatever they want.

Nah, "middle-class" is reasonbly defined in political science. Sure, it's more of an intangible defintion than a literal number...because $20,000 50 years ago is not $20,000 in 2010.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And the trickle-up theory is just as faulty. It relies on the government not being political (stupid).

Originally posted by King Kandy
"Trickle-up" being the effect where when the poor start living well, the money starts being taken by the rich? That's not faulty, but it is terrible.

I was referring to socialism in a tough in cheek way. I don't really know what in the world "Trickle-up" would really be.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was referring to socialism in a tough in cheek way. I don't really know what in the world "Trickle-up" would really be.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't really see why you think socialism can't work when most prosperous countries with functional economies use it.

It is all a matter of degree. If socialism is conducted on the local level, or the state level, then there is a greater chance of susses. However, socialism on a federal level is a disaster. However, I feel the same way about capitalism.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It is all a matter of degree. If socialism is conducted on the local level, or the state level, then there is a greater chance of susses. However, socialism on a federal level is a disaster. However, I feel the same way about capitalism.

Originally posted by King Kandy
But all socialist countries conduct it nationwide (IE, federally). So any success we've seen is indicative that federal socialism works.

And most of those countries are smaller then the state I live in. Their fed, is not comparable to the fed of the USA.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And most of those countries are smaller then the state I live in.

Originally posted by King Kandy
The EU isn't, and it's analogous to a socialist USA.

And it is becoming a disaster. It may not survive.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And it is becoming a disaster. It may not survive.

Originally posted by King Kandy
It's a disaster because of the same problems that are affecting every country on Earth right now (cept Norway... guess Socialism really failed them there). You think they would have done better if they were more capitalist?

I don't know. I think capitalist when applied to a large fed is as much of a disaster as socialism. They are both failed systems, on the large scale.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was referring to socialism in a tough in cheek way. I don't really know what in the world "Trickle-up" would really be.

Giving mass tax breaks to the lower and middle classes, on the notion that they'll use that extra money to buy even more junk they don't need from the upper class, thereby enriching the upper class (corporations) and stimulating the economy.

Or to put a comedic spin on it, something like this:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=reparations-2003&videoId=24406

Originally posted by Robtard
Giving mass tax breaks to the lower and middle classes, on the notion that they'll use that extra money to buy even more junk they don't need from the upper class, thereby enriching the upper class (corporations) and stimulating the economy.

Or to put a comedic spin on it, something like this:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=reparations-2003&videoId=24406

Are you telling me what a "Trickle-up" would really be? 😕