Skip to main content

 

I am not an economy expert by any means. I am not even a college grad. But what is happening today just doesn’t make sense to me. You give the wealthy a tax cut and it is going to trickle down to the rest of us? Why would it? How is this going to bring back jobs that we have lost? I have heard the wealthy being called the Job Creators. Really? What jobs? Does how much a person makes in the stock market really create jobs? Now I would agree we need healthy corporations to maintain the jobs that we have but how does giving more money to the rich bring up the lower and middle classes? 

Now for the longest time I have always thought that the key to growth would be putting more money into more people’s hands. Which is better, one person having the money to buy a new refrigerator or one hundred people buying a new refrigerator? I would think to have growth you would need to have people with money buying your product. I really do not think that cutting taxes for the rich really put money into the pockets of the poor. I think in a lot of the cases the money was saved made the rich richer but did nothing for the middle and lower classes.  Letting the money trickle up to the rich would be a much better solution. The money would still wind up with the rich in the end but it would think that it would pass through many hands on the way up.

There is something to be said for raising wages. When Henry Ford raised the wages to 5 dollars a day in 1914 that was a lot of money, about 120 dollars a day if converted into today’s money. People will tell you that Henry Ford did that so his workers could actually buy the cars they were producing. Now, that was a bi-product of that decision but what he wanted was a stable and productive work force. That was really the start of the middle class that we have today. So let’s talk about 15 dollars an hour, that would come out to 120 dollars a day. Would it have the same affect that Ford’s decision did back then? A lot of people would argue the pros and cons on that one. I would think putting money into the everyday worker’s hands would increase productivity, spending, growth, and also generate more taxable income that would help lower the debt. Seem s logical to me but I am sure a lot of people will have a real problem with that. 

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  There’s a simple way to judge a country: look at whose lives it protects, and whose lives it’s willing to forget. For years now, we’ve heard the phrase “All Lives Matter.” It sounds fair. It sounds equal. It sounds like common sense. But a country doesn’t reveal its values through slogans. It reveals them through actions, through the lives it defends, the lives it ignores, and the lives it quietly pushes out of sight. And lately, America has been doing a whole lot of looking away. When Black Americans said they were being killed during traffic stops and routine encounters, the response from many leaders wasn’t concern; it was irritation. Instead of saying, “Let’s fix the problem so fewer people die,” we heard “Blue Lives Matter,” “Stop resisting,” and “BLM is a terrorist group.” A man died in a chokehold on camera. We all saw, from the beginning to the end. It was like a modern-day lynching. Millions marched peacefully. The answer from those in power was “law and order,” and “...
Post a Comment
Read more
  On Saturday, I was looking at Facebook and a person I was friends with, in fact, someone I went to High School with, posted something I knew was wrong. The post claimed that four lawmakers in Colorado decided jail time shouldn’t be mandatory for people who committed sexual assault of children. She claimed they were pedophile protectors. I opened up Perplexity and asked about the situation, and this is the reply I got back: You’re referring to a recent controversy in Colorado over a proposed bill that would change sentencing rules for certain sex crimes. Here are the verified facts to clarify what’s actually happening: • In early 2026, the Colorado House Judiciary Committee held a vote on a sentencing reform bill that aimed to give judges more discretion in certain felony cases. • Some lawmakers voted against an amendment that would have made mandatory prison sentences apply to all sex crimes, including child sexual assault, preferring instead to let judges determine sentences...
4 comments
Read more
  Dove or hawk? Donald Trump ran for President promising to end “endless wars”, avoid new ones, and put American families first. He cast himself as an outsider who would bring peace – the only candidate who wouldn’t drag America into another conflict. The message worked because let's face it, after so many years in Iraq and Afghanistan, America was tired of war. As a country, we were all tired of War. The country wanted stability, not another generation of men and women sent into danger. But once in office, he governed very differently. He governed like a Hawk, quick to threaten, quick to escalate, and willing to use both bombs and tariffs as weapons. What was missing wasn’t just consistency. It was an honor: the sense of responsibility and restraint that should come with the power to risk other people's sons and daughters. This isn’t about ideology. It's about whether someone who promised peace, but repeatedly chooses confrontation, can still claim to be a “dove”. A core...
2 comments
Read more