General Discussion

Bernardo de La Paz

(60,320 posts)

36. Obviously b) giving to families. They will spend most of it in relatively short order.

Tue Jun 3, 2025, 08:14 PM

Jun 2025

It's why the tRump orientation trying to sell billionaires as the engine of job creation is so ignorant. The Big Billionaire Bill does the opposite, ballooning the deficit and debt to give a gift to billionaires who are likely to park it in art and gold and bitcoin crap.

Per Krugman:

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Threads: Guy pays me $50 for a speaker [View all] LiberalArkie Jun 2025 OP

Excellent. Midnight Writer Jun 2025 #1

Well .... Lurker Deluxe Jun 2025 #29

Except the bank doesn't sit on it ("for decades"). Disaffected Jun 2025 #2

Like stock buy backs and dividends to stock holders. flashman13 Jun 2025 #3

Both of which though keep the funds mobile and Disaffected Jun 2025 #5

Stock buybacks inject money into the economy because the stock has to PAID for. Likewise dividends Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #14

Stock buy backs waste productivity. They represent a failure to strengthen and build flashman13 Jun 2025 #18

Wrong. Stock is just a form of currency: a liquid asset that can be switched to cash and back. Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #19

No they don't. They are a form of corporate cancer. Enough said. flashman13 Jun 2025 #25

You will be unable to explain a coherent true understanding of your bizarre theory. Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #27

Ah yes, but cash in action(the flow) is what makes cachukis Jun 2025 #31

Exactly. If it can't be put in motion, then plow it back into the company, if you have confidence in the company Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #32

High brow. But the abuses seem to abound in cachukis Jun 2025 #33

Yes, the disparity in wealth and income btwn the 1% and the 50% is a big unsustainable problem. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #34

So you DO understand the multiplier effect! W_HAMILTON Jun 2025 #35

Obviously b) giving to families. They will spend most of it in relatively short order. Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #36

Yes -- and that's the point the OP was making. W_HAMILTON Jun 2025 #37

I direct you to my first post in this thread, #12. OP has a point but their argument does not make their point. . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #38

You get it. So many don't. . . .nt Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #13

That's also why "Trickle Down" is bullshit JoseBalow Jun 2025 #4

Nothing wrong with investing. The bullshit in "Trickle Down" is parking bucks in real estate and artwork. . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #15

My first thought was "What was the speaker?" CaptainTruth Jun 2025 #6

I understand. I wondered something similar... "Who was the speaker?" littlemissmartypants Jun 2025 #9

In another time: Codifer Jun 2025 #7

Money in motion. You get it. Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #16

Except someone is a thief. nt. druidity33 Jun 2025 #21

Excellent point and on top of that, they don't employ anyone, at least not in the numbers companies did 50 years ago n/t Cheezoholic Jun 2025 #8

But... littlemissmartypants Jun 2025 #10

Who exactly is the "they" in PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2025 #26

Nice to know Lurker Deluxe Jun 2025 #30

2025 XOM Capex GladysKravitz Jun 2025 #11

Welcome to DU. Good first post. You get it. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #17

Welcome to DU LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2025 #23

There is a point but the example is Bogus and Untrue and Ignorant of basic economics Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2025 #12

Another plus is Codifer Jun 2025 #20

Yes - the Velocity of Money Ruby the Liberal Jun 2025 #22

They're Parking Money In A Bank? ProfessorGAC Jun 2025 #24

"The restaurant owner gives it to the waitress," greyl Jun 2025 #28

If Exxon "Mobile" made profits by way of savings accounts Dreamer Tatum Jun 2025 #39