Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
You seriously think that CEO's of major corporations don't spend money? You really think Wall Street execs live miserly lifestyles? Yeah ok.
You can't say that people cant afford to eat and are broke then say they are going to be big consumers when given food stamps or a few dollars extra in their paychecks.
|
Not remotely close to what I said.
Quote:
|
Your idea that food stamps or payroll tax decreases cause all this stiulus spending is completely misguided.
|
Not according to the facts I see, but you're entitled to your own opinion.
Quote:
|
Food stamps are spend almost exclusively on food, an industry that is not expanding and is being paid in many cases not to expand. The minor amount of money each consumer receives from payroll tax decreases are generally used to pay off debt, pay utilities or rent. Sustenance living isnot effective stimulus. Paying your utility bill is not great stimulus. Buying food is not great stimulus.
|
It is when consumers have zero money, because they are unemployed. Wal Mart welcomes those with food aid cards. Because otherwise they are not selling food.
Quote:
|
The idea that the common investor has been screwed is bluster, plain and simple.
|
Yeah, the investment accounts of the "common investor" have been reaping gains averaging 8% a year since 1996, haven't they? Whoops - no, they have not.
Look, it is this simple:
Republicans say that if you give the wealthy tax and incentive financial breaks, they will create jobs regardless of lack of consumer demand. "Trickle down" theory (long disproven)
Democrats say too many people are unemployed, the middle class has been ravaged, there is no longer a huge consumer class creating the demand that allows jobs to be created.
Pick one as the basis of one's economic opinion formulation.