Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

[Greatest I am]

Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

The hockey stick graph introduced to the climate issue startled enough to start the trend to deal with it.

That shape showed the gross indecency and immorality of our collective focus.

That same immoral shape is what most countries now suffer in their socio-economic demographic pyramids, with a relatively small poor sector when compared to the whole; and especially when compared to the rich.

Statistically and in the long run, the rich have done a good job of improving our collective good.

Going from good to excellent would, cost the rich so little. I have to wonder why their demographers are not recommending that the rich take just a wee bit off the shank of the stick and fix the tip.

It is loose change (a bit of butt tape to our hockey stick), and if the rich will not fix the economy on their own, perhaps we should take their loose change, fix things, --- and raise their grade to excellent.

I understand that there are already several billionaires eager to start such a fund.

Get together, rich benevolent bunch, and set things right.

That will show the world why the rich rule the world.

My rich friends. Boost the trickle down with a one time trickle up and end poverty.

Please hurry, before I must answer yes to my own question.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

[onecaliberal]

1. WAY PAST TIME.

[Greatest I am]

7. Agreed.

That is 2.

[Blue Owl]

2. It's time to sue tRump again

[Greatest I am]

8. And then some.

A disgrace to the U.S. he be.

[GoodRaisin]

3. Trickle up is always good economic policy.

Nothing is better for the economy than getting money into the hands of those who will spend it. It benefits everyone.

Trickle down has been and always will be a bucket of shit.

[Greatest I am]

9. You are

Astute.

[Warpy]

4. The top has WAY too much and the bottom too little, thanks to Reagan

who shifted the bulk of the country's wealth away from the working and onto the richest. Average wages have lost purchasig power every year since the late 70s, Greenspan diddling the CPI by filling the standard market basket with cheaper options.

Every extra dollar to the rich is a hoarded dollar. Every dme to working people is going to be spent, adding labor at every place in the economy it goes, increasing the worth of that dime. Money at the bottom increases business at all levels as it travels through the economy. This has long been known as the multiplier effect, something Republicans want to pretend doesn't exist.

The "invisible hand of the marketplace" is a fairy story, even Adam Smith knew capitalism needed regulation. The multiplier effect is a real phenomenon, demonstrated and replicated across cultures and continents.

It's time to drive a stake through the wicked hearts of Hayek and von Mises and admit that running a country on the cheap for the benefit of a tiny class of rich men does not work. It's time to take care of the rest of us for a change, paying a real day's wage for a day's work and bringing back the concept of the commons.

[Greatest I am]

10. You left nothing

for me to argue against.

[Lunabell]

5. It wouldn't be taking from the rich.

It would be the rich paying their fair share. Why do they get a tax break for yachts and private airplanes? I don't get a tax break for buying a car to get me to work. They need to finally pay a fair share!!

[Greatest I am]

11. Yes.

Long overdue.

[IbogaProject]

6. We have to be careful w branding tax hikes

The actual justification isn't to redistribute like Robin Hood. It is for the simple fact as one earns more the slower they spend it. A grandma in the projects spends quickly and locally. The wealthy spend slowly and often elsewhere much later. It's about economic growth, when the tax code was progressive the economy grew faster. I majored in Economics, the spending by economic quintiles is vastly different. The bottom 40% have an income multiplier of nearly 11 times more in 12 months. The top 20% spend so slowly on average, that their spending multiplies by less than once more overall over 12 months past their earning. Art, luxury items, far away investments and so on. We've been cutting taxes for them the last 40 years and economic growth has stagnated and with their extra loot they have circumvented campaign finance limits. This isn't about taking from one individual to give to another, that isn't going to sell, as too many foolishly expect to become rich. This has to be sold to fuel economic growth to regrow and expand the middle class.

[Greatest I am]

12. Yes.

And end poverty for national pride.