TFW people still believe the wealth doesn't trickle down.
>not a liberal strawman
All economic growth comes from investment, and investment comes from rich people
Economic growth helps the poor most of all; and it helps them far more than socialism does.
Better to have 4% of a pie which is getting a lot bigger all the time: than 5% of a pie which isn't growing at all.
Not only that but most poverty is temporary and if you take 5% of the stagnant pie you'll get taxed more later on
You won't ever be rich though, if you fall into the poverty trap and live on free shit your entire life.
Not only that but taxes interfere in other ways since people change their behaviour
Overall I think this is solid logic 8/10
why is western civilization so hellbent on comparing extremes at all times?
it's always the uber wealthy evil menacing old man with 50000 private jets vs the poor homeless man who's freezing outside
shit y'all gotta grow the fuck up
>tfw people believe income inequality is inherently a bad thing.
Am I the only one who thinks the image on the left looks kinda comfy? I mean the apartments mostly, if you cleaned them up a little they wouldnt be too shabby, and the view is nice as well
The one on the left screams "probably going to get shot if you live here"
But it is m8. I lived my first 12 years in a gommieblock, and I had the best childhood ever. Together with the 15 boys from my block we were in a "war" with those from the neighboring one. We played football in front of it, made "expeditions" on the roof, made "secret bases" in the basements and so much more. Then my family moved to a house that's older than your country and I lost all those friends, except one.
middle class in britain
Investment benefits the poor a whole lot
Just think about building a new factory in some Vietnamese village and then everyone there gets rich.
You're lucky I don't buy a new boat instead.
The difference to me might be minimal since I like boats about as much as factories
Actually, American houses are built from wood and shit and cost 20 to 50 thousand dollars.
An apartment in the Russian house in your picture costs 120 to 200 thousand dollars.
Here, I just googled you a few examples
Refugee class in Britain
upper middle class britain
upper class britain
He said it wasn't comzy. I said it is. Where did you get the economic realities thing from? And your argument is shit anyway. Me and my brother had our own bikes. We studied in good schools. Had new clothes, new toys, new cd players, TV for the parents and a TV for the kids and all that shit that you think only you had. But as I said, the most important thing was that we had a big group of friends.
Daily reminder that the upper class is growing at a faster rate than the lower class
I don't think it's inherently bad, but I think extreme income inequality as has occurred over the last 20 years here is bad. Economists agree that it is slowing the growth of GDP since it retards demand.
This is what the US Federal Government builds with taxpayer monies to house subsidized welfare recipients. i.g. "Section 8"
Probably cost around $170,000 to build, not counting the land and development.
The person placed in such units pay less than $200 (or so) a month in "Rent" and their utilities are also subsidized so maybe only pay $40 for heat.
Source is from a "Project" area near Cincinnati Gardens, an area that is "Culturally Enriched".
Are you also considering the fact that different think tanks will use different definitions for each group to suit their own agenda?
A more telling graph would give us income adjusted by area. Otherwise they could mean that Upper is simply anyone who makes 85K+
Oh, there used to be several tower blocks.
There still are some.
BUT the Welfare Leeches lobbied saying that it was "demeaning" or some shit to be in apartment blocks.
Said that there was no sense of "neighborhoods".
Keep in mind that they had utterly RUINED some of the nicer buildings that had been granted over for "Sction 8".
So the Gov has for past 20 years been building "traditional neighborhood houses" instead of apartment blocks, and the apartment blocks that are too far gone to repair get demolished and replaced with more single family houses.
>implying investing is not risky
>implying millions of rich people never went back to being middle class because of failed investment
People accept long hours and shitty pay because it's better than no hour and shitty pay.
I work 60 hours week in the ban which is owned by billionaires because I am way better off than working other jobs or not working
I don't care that I make nothing compared to the people at the top. I feel grateful they created that job for me.
I guess location matters. I was looking for houses out there when I was planning on moving to a town near Manchester called Wilmslow for work. There were 5 million GBP houses that were smaller than that one.
Chinese are masters of flipping houses. I know a Chinese guy with a giant 9 million dollar house in Palo Alto. The guy only gets like $140k/year. He literally sells his home every year for more than double what he purchased it for. Been doing it since the 90s taking advantage of the tech boom. I get paid about the same and struggle with my 1M shitbox house in SF.
>government causes financial crisis
>capitalism is to blame
>government bails out banks
>capitalism is to blame
Why did my ancestors leave?
Why did they come to the shithole that is america?
We got fucked big time by free trade with China and Mexico. I don't generally support tariffs, but they'd be a good solution to this issue. Just tax any good not produced with EPA and OSHA standards.
Rented an apartment in a commieblock on the northside of Kiev, was p cozy not gonna lie.
>said the city dwelling consumer who spends most of his money on living expenses.
Protip: if you fuel the consumer economy you are cattle, period. Your only pushing this system along further, many multitudes more than the rural American, who buys far less than you.
It doesn't. The marginal propensity to spend by wealthy people is magnitudes smaller than the rest of the economic classes.
If you give a rich person money. They won't spend it. In fact they will do everything to use it to get more of it. Nothing "trickles" down.
Although trickle maybe be an adequate description of the money flowing out of them.
Slavs are the coldest fuckin people in public, but they're sweetie pies in private
Middle class in Florida (my house).
Older development, everything isn't too expensive. Newer developments look a lot nicer as well, and are typically 2+ stories.
Midwest cuckshed $120k?
The "trickle down" meme is one of liberals' greatest successes. They were successfully able to convince even /pol/ that we are "giving" tax breaks to fat cat capitalists and corporations. As if the govt NOT taking away the money someone earns equates to some kind of generous gift.
When you take less from a business in taxes, that business can invest more of its revenue into expanding, which means hiring more people or buying more equipment (which helps other businesses hire more people). This works well when a business' growth is limited by taxes, and not so well for companies that are already beyond their capacity to expand more.
This is messy and poorly kept up.
That being said, trailers are worth a good bit of cash. That's a nice plot of land. I'd take that over an apartment. The lack of a rent payment and the land to grow your own food means the owner of this trailer probably has more disposable income than most of us.
It's even worse, when you divide it by women vs men.
Sadly, this is true. UK sucks nigger dick harder than the USA does.
It's 7% larger. Also, in the given period, the upper class increased by 50% while the lower class increased by 20%. Therefore, the upper class is growing at a faster rate than the lower class.
>can see lake, forest and mountains from my computer seat
Thank Dog I was born in better part of Russia.
Rich people own highly desirable real estate. Even in poor times highly valued property doesnt drop all that much.
Poor people dont, so a hit in income shows 100%
Plus the spack-tarded policy of inflating the fuck out of the stock exchange, meaning if you had big money there 7 years ago it has doubled. (thanks 0% interest rates!)
Raising Long Term Capital Gains taxes to like 30% isn't going to destroy economic growth. Use the added revenue to cut taxes on the middle class and spur demand at the bottom to reignite the economy. Also, let the poor starve to death. They contribute basically nothing so fuck 'em.
Nothing makes investments mandatory for rich peoples, they can juste sit on their money and invest nothing
They can choose to put their money in bnak or 'invest' it in some virtual economy which don't create jobs at all such finance economy.
Overall, nothing says that in 20 years enough human work will be necessary to produce goods, and therefeore wealthy could invest on production and make profit without any benefits for the workers.