Is trickle down economics a pyramid scheme? Why or why not.?

Question

Please know the functional processes of a pyramid scheme before answering.

Answer 1

No....



...In a pyramid scheme there is no way for those on the lower tiers to gain any benefit without the constant addition of more lower tiers below them..In fact, a pyramid scheme is the exact opposite of Supply Side economics...



...The basic premise of "supply side" economics is that if you support "producers" then more "consumers" will benefit. Signs of this are apparent all around you as it is very likely that you had little to do with the development, production and distribution of many of the goods you take for granted today.



As an illustration, mobile phones, personal computers, big screen TVs, performance automobiles all existed when Reagan took office.....but they were reserved for the very wealthy. Thanks to the capitalization of companies like Intel, Apple, Microsoft etc. Those things and more are now considered middle-class "necessities..."



In other words, all tiers of the pyramid now have access to the same goods and benefits regardless of their ability to produce....no lower tiers are necessary.



The pyramid model has the opposite effect because it is all about supporting demand....Because the upper tiers no longer produce wealth (loss of manufacturing and production base), they can only obtain wealth by taking a cut of the lower tiers ... the lower tiers meanwhile can only feed their need to consume by the constant addition of lower tiers...



Think how this relates to the last 30 years and the shift from a production-based economy to a consumer-based one...The focus has shifted from "making pie" to fighting over who gets to cut it up...meanwhile, lax immigration and educational policies ensure the creation of a permanent lower-tier sub-culture

Answer 2

No. With a traditional pyramid scheme, the money trickles from the bottom up.



"Trickle Down" Economics goes the opposite way.

Answer 3

Trickle down economics has been working for many decades, long before Reagan and his buddies ever coined the term.



The evidence is all around you. If Trickle down didn't work, we'd have a small amount of super wealthy people, and everyone else would be poor. The fact that we have a large middle class means the money does flow back down from the wealthy.

Answer 4

you missed the point of the political revolutions that occurred between 1989 and 1995.



Eastern Europe, China, and India all opened themselves to trading with the rest of the world. All three massive population areas had low or very low capital goods in place per worker, thus had low output value per worker.



Further, significant capital goods can not be created and installed over night, so, in order to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of living standards, they must initially hold labor costs down in order to run a positive balance of payments and thus have the ability to massive invest in capital goods.



This inevitably means that jobs must shift to these low wage countries and that the rest of the world must run a balance of payments deficit, probably for decades.



That's workable only until the accumulated debts of the previously developed world can no longer be serviced -- which is now.



Since the debts can not continue to pyramid, and will be lower one way or another, it follows that either the owners of wealth in the developed world will be dispossessed of their wealth or the workers in the developed world will take large pay cuts via some means [devaluing the currency is one such means].



American politics is currently about the balance between these two adjustment mechanisms.

Answer 5

No, it isn't. A pyramid scheme relies on a steady influx of investors to pay up the pyramid. Trickle down economics relies on both directions.

Answer 6

and look at how nicely the two artwork to dupe specific varieties. the only people who fall for those issues, are people who think of they're specific, they'll artwork extra durable than every physique else, and that they gets to the best on their reward. in addition they stumble on with those on the best, via fact they're basically too darn specific to be with the rest individuals for the full lives. nicely, whilst i grew to become into six years previous, I used to think of i'd be a princess if I lived in England. Then, I grew up and found out i grew to become into incorrect (as quickly as I grew to become seven).

Answer 7

maybe but the trickle never makes it past the top

Answer 8

Please know the fundamental processes of trickle down economics before asking this question.

Answer 9

maybe