Corporate Profits At All Time High:

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 11:44 AM

Waiting for the trickle down to start. Any day now that money has to start making it's way down to the rest of us. That is how it works right?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 11:47 AM

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 11:50 AM

Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama?

AlBell · 1st December 2012, 11:55 AM

Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc.

What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by AlBell

Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc.

First off, these are all assertions and I think thoroughly debunked. But for the purpose of this discussion I'll take the null hypothesis. Citation please? (I reject your premises as fatuous right-wing rhetoric and I find them laughable but I'll give you a chance to make your case).

Quote:

What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production?

So let me see, supply side economics is so fragile just about anything can disrupt the apple cart, right? Dude there will ALWAYS be uncertainty. By your logic supply side economics cannot work because we can never remove uncertainty from the equation.

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

"You didn't build that", etc.

What the sam hell is this supposed to mean? Did you really so easily drink the kool-aid? That was thoroughly debunked.

geni · 1st December 2012, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc.

What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production?

Well if the EPA is out of control it sounds like an excelent time to get involved in the waste management industry.

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by geni

Originally Posted by AlBell

EPA out of control

Well if the EPA is out of control it sounds like an excelent time to get involved in the waste management industry.

If the EPA is "out of control" how is it that corporate profits and the stock market are up? Sounds like ad hoc rationalization to me. It also sounds like poisoning the well for debates about climate change.

Skeptic Ginger · 1st December 2012, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama?

I was going to ask the same question. Why would the people who are doing so well financially believe they would do better with someone else as Pres?

Did they tell their lies so often they truly believe them?

Are they really that greedy they just want more?

Skeptic Ginger · 1st December 2012, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc.

What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production?

So, chalk one up to "believes the lies".

theprestige · 1st December 2012, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Corporate Profits After Tax (CP)

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/1...ateprofits.png

Waiting for the trickle down to start. Any day now that money has to start making it's way down to the rest of us. That is how it works right?

Let's see... The economy is improving, unemployment is going down... What did you expect "trickle down" to look like? A fat check in your Christmas stocking, in the value of "your share of corporate profits", countersigned by The Corporations?

Or is it now that the election is over, suddenly it's safe to say the economy hasn't really improved that much, and Obama should have done more to convince corporations to Do Their Part?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Let's see... The economy is improving, unemployment is going down... What did you expect "trickle down" to look like? A fat check in your Christmas stocking, in the value of "your share of corporate profits", countersigned by The Corporations?

What should it look like?

Quote:

Or is it now that the election is over, suddenly it's safe to say the economy hasn't really improved that much, and Obama should have done more to convince corporations to Do Their Part?

Who is saying ANYTHING differently now than before the election? Sure as hell isn't me. What is safe to say is that there is very little correlation between increased profits of corporations and an increase in the stock market and increased wealth for the lower classes. When the rich get richer it means just that and not much more.

I'm happy for you to show me how I'm wrong. But let's be clear here, you are not going to win the day with rhetorical questions. Could you pony your belly up to the bar and make an argument backed by empirical data?

DavidJames · 1st December 2012, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Could you pony your belly up to the bar and make an argument backed by empirical data?

Good luck with that.

Like I said in another thread. There don't seem to be any intellectually honest Republicans/conservatives left at JREF any more.

Kilaak Kommander · 1st December 2012, 02:12 PM

Clearly all of those lazy deadbeats in the lower income brackets need to get off the sofa and form muti-billion dollar corporations. Duh.

CaptBang · 1st December 2012, 02:20 PM

Attention, please!

If anyone actually believes in the old trickle-down theory of economics made very popular through misleading propaganda from Ronald Reagan and his handlers, step forward, please.

None? Didn't think so.

Nice charts in the thread. Gotta love charts.

DGM · 1st December 2012, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama?

Could it be because they care what happens to their stock holders? Is profit wrong?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

Could it be because they care what happens to their stock holders?

I'm not sure I know what this means or its relevance. Could you explain?

Quote:

Is profit wrong?

Did I say that profit was wrong?

DGM · 1st December 2012, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'm not sure I know what this means or its relevance. Could you explain?

Did I say that profit was wrong?

I would love to, if you could explain the point of this thread? Are you claiming Obamas policies have brought on these profits?

Skeptical Greg · 1st December 2012, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

...

Waiting for the trickle down to start. Any day now that money has to start making it's way down to the rest of us. That is how it works right?

What part of the trickle down are you entitled to, and why ?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

I would love to, if you could explain the point of this thread? Are you claiming Obamas policies have brought on these profits?

I'm claiming that there is little or no correlation between increased wealth at the top of the economic ladder with increased wealth at the bottom of the economic ladder. My point is that supply side economics is, as far as I can tell, without any evidence in fact.

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

What part of the trickle down are you entitled to, and why ?

I'm not sure I understand (unless you are being tongue-in-cheek then I get it). If not then I don't think I'm entitled to anything. I've just never seen any evidence think it works.

DGM · 1st December 2012, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'm claiming that there is little or no correlation between increased wealth at the top of the economic ladder with increased wealth at the bottom of the economic ladder. My point is that supply side economics is, as far as I can tell, without any evidence in fact.

So what? What would this have to do with the current administration? Why did you bring it up?

Darth Rotor · 1st December 2012, 03:19 PM

Rand, just curious: don't you think this thread belongs in the ecnomics sub forum?

As to profits being up, those companies the did not get felled by the recession in the past few years seem to have found novel ways to cut costs or pick up assets at fire sale prices. That may contribute to some of the profit increases.

Or it may not be that simple, when you look at the numbers you posted at the macro / aggregate level, which you have done.

Did your sources break it down by sector and industry?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

So what?

"So"? So, I wanted to point out the facts and discuss them. Is that against my membership agreement?

Quote:

What would this have to do with the current administration?

Absolutely nothing. Why do you ask?

Quote:

Why did you bring it up?

Let me make this simple for you. I bring up things I wish to discuss (I wish to discuss this). If you are not interested then please to ignore this thread. Why does this thread interest you or, why does it bother you?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Rand, just curious: don't you think this thread belongs in the ecnomics sub forum?

Probably.

Quote:

As to profits being up, those companies the did not get felled by the recession in the past few years seem to have found novel ways to cut costs or pick up assets at fire sale prices. That may contribute to some of the profit increases.

Or it may not be that simple, when you look at the numbers you posted at the macro / aggregate level, which you have done.

Did your sources break it down by sector and industry?

Could you point me to the part of the hypothesis of supply side economics that stipulates that it only works for some industries?

Again, let me keep this simple, I don't think there is any evidence of a correlation between increased wealth at the top of the economic ladder with increased wealth at the bottom. Sure the hypothesis (supply side economics) could be viable and I could be ignoring some key variable. I honestly don't know. I know it's one more example of there being no correlation.

Skeptical Greg · 1st December 2012, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'm not sure I understand (unless you are being tongue-in-cheek then I get it). If not then I don't think I'm entitled to anything. I've just never seen any evidence think it works.

You said you were waiting for the trickle down to start.

Why are you waiting for that to happen ?

By the way, did your sources indicate whether profit margins were up ?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama?

Originally Posted by DGM

What would this have to do with the current administration?

The thread isn't about Obama. I added this post as an afterthought. I think the outrage directed at Obama is absurd given the facts.

DGM · 1st December 2012, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

"So"? So, I wanted to point out the facts and discuss them. Is that against my membership agreement?

It doesn't, I wonder why you bring it up.

Originally Posted by RandFan

Let me make this simple for you. I bring up things I wish to discuss (I wish to discuss this). If you are not interested then please to ignore this thread. Why does this thread interest you or, why does it bother you?

I wonder why you made this comment if it has nothing to do with the current administration:

Quote:

Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama?

Were you venting or just hoping for fan support?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

You said you were waiting for the trickle down to start.

Why are you waiting for that to happen ?

It's called a rhetorical device. You can find out more about them at wiki.

Quote:

By the way, did your sources indicate whether profit margins were up ?

I honestly don't know. Is it claimed by the proponents of supply side economics that it only works when profit margins are high? Do you have some reason to believe that profit margins are down given the austerity of the past 5-6 years of downsizing and reducing corporate debt? Do you have some data showing that supply side economics is correlated with higher revenue at the bottom rung of the economic ladder when profit margins are high?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

I wonder why you bring it up.

And I explained it to you.

Quote:

Were you venting or just hoping for fan support?

See post #27

So, I've answered your questions and you've not at all contributed. If you continue in this vain I will report you as being OT. Fair enough?

DGM · 1st December 2012, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

The thread isn't about Obama. I added this post as an afterthought. I think the outrage directed at Obama is absurd given the facts.

What facts would that be? Are you telling me Obamas policy are pro corporate profits?

Skeptical Greg · 1st December 2012, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Do you have some data showing that supply side economics is correlated with higher revenue at the bottom rung of the economic ladder when profit margins are high?

I'm not making any claims about the benefits of supply side economics.. You'll have to wait till someone shows up, who is.

I'm also not the one throwing out data and suggesting it means something.

Do you understand the significance of profit margins in relation to total profits?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

What facts would that be?

Corporate profits are up.
The stock market is up.

Quote:

Are you telling me Obamas policy are pro corporate profits?

I'm telling you that corporate profits are up in-spite of or because of Obama.

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

Do you understand the significance of profit margins in relation to total profits?

I wrote and maintained accounting software for over 40 years and I still have a few clients. I was also an auditor for 7-8 years. I know how to calculate profit margins and I understand the relationship of profit margins to totals profits.

I've answered your questions.
You have ignored mine.

I won't answer anymore of your questions if you are going to bear me the contempt of simply ignoring that which you find uncomfortable. Fair enough?

DGM · 1st December 2012, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Corporate profits are up.
The stock market is up.

I'm telling you that corporate profits are up in-spite of or because of Obama.

So you really have no point to discuss. You're just stating fact.

What do you want to talk about?

RandFan · 1st December 2012, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Is it claimed by the proponents of supply side economics that it only works when profit margins are high?
Do you have some reason to believe that profit margins are down given the austerity of the past 5-6 years of downsizing and reducing corporate debt?
Do you have some data showing that supply side economics is correlated with higher revenue at the bottom rung of the economic ladder when profit margins are high?

Here's hoping for mutual respect in our discussion.

StuartSymington · 1st December 2012, 03:59 PM

Personal and corporate tax rates need to be reset to what they were under
President Eisenhower, the last fiscal conservative we had in the USA.
The $32 Trillion that has been hidden in illegal offshore accounts since
1971 (the end of the gold standard) needs to be repatriated to the
USA.

What they are currently arguing about on Capitol Hill is small change.

It may take a revolution to fix what is wrong in the USA today.

DGM · 1st December 2012, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by StuartSymington

Personal and corporate tax rates need to be rest to what they were under
President Eisenhower. The last Fiscal conservative we had in the USA.
The $32 Trillion that has been hidden in illegal offshore accounts since
1971 (the end of the gold standard) needs to be repatriated to the
USA.

What they are currently arguing about on Capitol Hill is small change.

It may take a revolution to fix what is wrong in the USA today.

Welcome and wrong thread (sub-forum).

Jorghnassen · 1st December 2012, 04:02 PM

More fuel for this futile discussion.

DGM · 1st December 2012, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Here's hoping for mutual respect in our discussion.

Why are you posting this in current events? I'm asking for it to be moved.

1st December 2012, 11:44 AM	#1
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Corporate Profits At All Time High: Corporate Profits After Tax (CP) Waiting for the trickle down to start. Any day now that money has to start making it's way down to the rest of us. That is how it works right?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 11:47 AM	#2
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Then there is the stock market.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 11:50 AM	#3
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 11:55 AM	#4
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,497	Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc. What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production?
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,497

1st December 2012, 11:59 AM	#5
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by AlBell Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc. First off, these are all assertions and I think thoroughly debunked. But for the purpose of this discussion I'll take the null hypothesis. Citation please? (I reject your premises as fatuous right-wing rhetoric and I find them laughable but I'll give you a chance to make your case). Quote: What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production? So let me see, supply side economics is so fragile just about anything can disrupt the apple cart, right? Dude there will ALWAYS be uncertainty. By your logic supply side economics cannot work because we can never remove uncertainty from the equation.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 12:02 PM	#6
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	BTW: Originally Posted by AlBell "You didn't build that", etc. What the sam hell is this supposed to mean? Did you really so easily drink the kool-aid? That was thoroughly debunked.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 12:19 PM	#7
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,568	Originally Posted by AlBell Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc. What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production? Well if the EPA is out of control it sounds like an excelent time to get involved in the waste management industry.

1st December 2012, 12:41 PM	#8
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by geni Originally Posted by AlBell EPA out of control Well if the EPA is out of control it sounds like an excelent time to get involved in the waste management industry. If the EPA is "out of control" how is it that corporate profits and the stock market are up? Sounds like ad hoc rationalization to me. It also sounds like poisoning the well for debates about climate change.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 12:44 PM	#9
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,572	Originally Posted by RandFan Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama? I was going to ask the same question. Why would the people who are doing so well financially believe they would do better with someone else as Pres? Did they tell their lies so often they truly believe them? Are they really that greedy they just want more?
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

1st December 2012, 12:45 PM	#10
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,572	Originally Posted by AlBell Obamacare yet undefined, EPA out of control, "You didn't build that", etc. What would make you believe it's a good time to hire more staff or even expand production? So, chalk one up to "believes the lies".
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

1st December 2012, 12:52 PM	#11
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,598	Originally Posted by RandFan Corporate Profits After Tax (CP) http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/1...ateprofits.png Waiting for the trickle down to start. Any day now that money has to start making it's way down to the rest of us. That is how it works right? Let's see... The economy is improving, unemployment is going down... What did you expect "trickle down" to look like? A fat check in your Christmas stocking, in the value of "your share of corporate profits", countersigned by The Corporations? Or is it now that the election is over, suddenly it's safe to say the economy hasn't really improved that much, and Obama should have done more to convince corporations to Do Their Part?
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,598

1st December 2012, 01:04 PM	#12
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by theprestige Let's see... The economy is improving, unemployment is going down... What did you expect "trickle down" to look like? A fat check in your Christmas stocking, in the value of "your share of corporate profits", countersigned by The Corporations? What should it look like? Quote: Or is it now that the election is over, suddenly it's safe to say the economy hasn't really improved that much, and Obama should have done more to convince corporations to Do Their Part? Who is saying ANYTHING differently now than before the election? Sure as hell isn't me. What is safe to say is that there is very little correlation between increased profits of corporations and an increase in the stock market and increased wealth for the lower classes. When the rich get richer it means just that and not much more. I'm happy for you to show me how I'm wrong. But let's be clear here, you are not going to win the day with rhetorical questions. Could you pony your belly up to the bar and make an argument backed by empirical data?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 01:43 PM	#13
DavidJames Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 7,087	Originally Posted by RandFan Could you pony your belly up to the bar and make an argument backed by empirical data? Good luck with that. Like I said in another thread. There don't seem to be any intellectually honest Republicans/conservatives left at JREF any more.
	__________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.

1st December 2012, 02:12 PM	#14
Kilaak Kommander Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Happy Valley Posts: 316	Clearly all of those lazy deadbeats in the lower income brackets need to get off the sofa and form muti-billion dollar corporations. Duh.

1st December 2012, 02:20 PM	#15
CaptBang Scholar Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: NYC Posts: 117	Attention, please! If anyone actually believes in the old trickle-down theory of economics made very popular through misleading propaganda from Ronald Reagan and his handlers, step forward, please. None? Didn't think so. Nice charts in the thread. Gotta love charts.

1st December 2012, 02:22 PM	#16
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,341	Originally Posted by RandFan Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama? Could it be because they care what happens to their stock holders? Is profit wrong?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

1st December 2012, 02:31 PM	#17
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by DGM Could it be because they care what happens to their stock holders? I'm not sure I know what this means or its relevance. Could you explain? Quote: Is profit wrong? Did I say that profit was wrong?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 02:40 PM	#18
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,341	Originally Posted by RandFan I'm not sure I know what this means or its relevance. Could you explain? Did I say that profit was wrong? I would love to, if you could explain the point of this thread? Are you claiming Obamas policies have brought on these profits?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

1st December 2012, 03:01 PM	#19
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by RandFan ... Waiting for the trickle down to start. Any day now that money has to start making it's way down to the rest of us. That is how it works right? What part of the trickle down are you entitled to, and why ?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

1st December 2012, 03:11 PM	#20
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by DGM I would love to, if you could explain the point of this thread? Are you claiming Obamas policies have brought on these profits? I'm claiming that there is little or no correlation between increased wealth at the top of the economic ladder with increased wealth at the bottom of the economic ladder. My point is that supply side economics is, as far as I can tell, without any evidence in fact.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:13 PM	#21
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg What part of the trickle down are you entitled to, and why ? I'm not sure I understand (unless you are being tongue-in-cheek then I get it). If not then I don't think I'm entitled to anything. I've just never seen any evidence think it works.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:19 PM	#22
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,341	Originally Posted by RandFan I'm claiming that there is little or no correlation between increased wealth at the top of the economic ladder with increased wealth at the bottom of the economic ladder. My point is that supply side economics is, as far as I can tell, without any evidence in fact. So what? What would this have to do with the current administration? Why did you bring it up?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

1st December 2012, 03:19 PM	#23
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,257	Rand, just curious: don't you think this thread belongs in the ecnomics sub forum? As to profits being up, those companies the did not get felled by the recession in the past few years seem to have found novel ways to cut costs or pick up assets at fire sale prices. That may contribute to some of the profit increases. Or it may not be that simple, when you look at the numbers you posted at the macro / aggregate level, which you have done. Did your sources break it down by sector and industry?
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

1st December 2012, 03:28 PM	#24
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by DGM So what? "So"? So, I wanted to point out the facts and discuss them. Is *that* against my membership agreement? Quote: What would this have to do with the current administration? Absolutely nothing. Why do you ask? Quote: Why did you bring it up? Let me make this simple for you. I bring up things I wish to discuss (I wish to discuss this). If you are not interested then please to ignore this thread. Why does this thread interest you or, why does it bother you?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith Last edited by RandFan; 1st December 2012 at 03:29 PM.

1st December 2012, 03:35 PM	#25
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Rand, just curious: don't you think this thread belongs in the ecnomics sub forum? Probably. Quote: As to profits being up, those companies the did not get felled by the recession in the past few years seem to have found novel ways to cut costs or pick up assets at fire sale prices. That may contribute to some of the profit increases. Or it may not be that simple, when you look at the numbers you posted at the macro / aggregate level, which you have done. Did your sources break it down by sector and industry? Could you point me to the part of the hypothesis of supply side economics that stipulates that it only works for some industries? Again, let me keep this simple, I don't think there is any evidence of a correlation between increased wealth at the top of the economic ladder with increased wealth at the bottom. Sure the hypothesis (supply side economics) could be viable and I could be ignoring some key variable. I honestly don't know. I know it's one more example of there being no correlation.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:36 PM	#26
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by RandFan I'm not sure I understand (unless you are being tongue-in-cheek then I get it). If not then I don't think I'm entitled to anything. I've just never seen any evidence think it works. You said you were waiting for the trickle down to start. Why are you waiting for that to happen ? By the way, did your sources indicate whether profit margins were up ?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 1st December 2012 at 03:37 PM.

1st December 2012, 03:38 PM	#27
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by RandFan Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama? Originally Posted by DGM What would this have to do with the current administration? The thread isn't about Obama. I added this post as an afterthought. I think the outrage directed at Obama is absurd given the facts.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:43 PM	#28
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,341	Originally Posted by RandFan "So"? So, I wanted to point out the facts and discuss them. Is *that* against my membership agreement? It doesn't, I wonder why you bring it up. Originally Posted by RandFan Let me make this simple for you. I bring up things I wish to discuss (I wish to discuss this). If you are not interested then please to ignore this thread. Why does this thread interest you or, why does it bother you? I wonder why you made this comment if it has nothing to do with the current administration: Quote: Corporate profits are up. Stock market is up. Is there anyone out there that does not get why the "job creators" are so damn upset at Obama? Were you venting or just hoping for fan support?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

1st December 2012, 03:46 PM	#29
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg You said you were waiting for the trickle down to start. Why are you waiting for that to happen ? It's called a rhetorical device. You can find out more about them at wiki. Quote: By the way, did your sources indicate whether profit margins were up ? I honestly don't know. Is it claimed by the proponents of supply side economics that it only works when profit margins are high? Do you have some reason to believe that profit margins are down given the austerity of the past 5-6 years of downsizing and reducing corporate debt? Do you have some data showing that supply side economics is correlated with higher revenue at the bottom rung of the economic ladder when profit margins are high?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:49 PM	#30
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by DGM I wonder why you bring it up. And I explained it to you. Quote: Were you venting or just hoping for fan support? See post #27 So, I've answered your questions and you've not at all contributed. If you continue in this vain I will report you as being OT. Fair enough?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith Last edited by RandFan; 1st December 2012 at 03:51 PM.

1st December 2012, 03:50 PM	#31
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,341	Originally Posted by RandFan The thread isn't about Obama. I added this post as an afterthought. I think the outrage directed at Obama is absurd given the facts. What facts would that be? Are you telling me Obamas policy are pro corporate profits?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

1st December 2012, 03:52 PM	#32
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Quote: Do you have some data showing that supply side economics is correlated with higher revenue at the bottom rung of the economic ladder when profit margins are high? I'm not making any claims about the benefits of supply side economics.. You'll have to wait till someone shows up, who is. I'm also not the one throwing out data and suggesting it means something. Do you understand the significance of profit margins in relation to total profits?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

1st December 2012, 03:53 PM	#33
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by DGM What facts would that be? Corporate profits are up. The stock market is up. Quote: Are you telling me Obamas policy are pro corporate profits? I'm telling you that corporate profits are up in-spite of or because of Obama.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:57 PM	#34
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,244	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg Do you understand the significance of profit margins in relation to total profits? I wrote and maintained accounting software for over 40 years and I still have a few clients. I was also an auditor for 7-8 years. I know how to calculate profit margins and I understand the relationship of profit margins to totals profits. I've answered your questions. You have ignored mine. I won't answer anymore of your questions if you are going to bear me the contempt of simply ignoring that which you find uncomfortable. Fair enough?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

1st December 2012, 03:59 PM	#35
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,341	Originally Posted by RandFan Corporate profits are up. The stock market is up. I'm telling you that corporate profits are up in-spite of or because of Obama. So you really have no point to discuss. You're just stating fact. What do you want to talk about?
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley