| mirgro said: I would like to point out a simple fault with the trickle down. If you take a CEO and he has a private plane, the price range on those are between $6 mil to $60 mil. In the best case scenario, that's 6 jobs being paid $100,000 a year for 10 years. You can adjust those numbers inversely of course. Worst case scenario would be 60 jobs being paid $100,000 for a year. This is simply for a plane. I hear upkeep is anotheer $100,000 - $200,000 per year so that's another job or two every year spent on a plan. I fully realize that those money are going somewhere else which also creates jobs. So the real question is, why not just give the lower classes the $6 million initially and they can just bubble it up back to the rich by buying more things? The lower classes definitely could use the $6 mil, for food or a few luxury items ehre and there, but the CEO can easily live his life without a plane. The truth is that the rich are rich because they know how to make money and, most importantly, keep it. Yes they will spend some, but they would not be rich if they just wasted all of their money. The poor however, always spend their money, they are reliable like that. SO if anything the money would bubble up to the rich anyhow and stay there. It's just that in one way the poor get something along the way of making the rich richer. |
Of course, your forgetting a lot.
For example, who built the plane? Planes come from somewhere. If it was a typical Gulfstream jet, it was made by Gulfstream Aerospace in Georgia. The $6 million price tag on the jet was for what? Building the aircraft, which did employ a number of people for a number of years.
So if you want to take away the jet from the CEO, then you are destroying jobs as well at Gulfstream. You must remember: no money, no matter who it belongs to, is not kept in a vault, away from being used in some form or fashion.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
