Lewis Black Has The Ultimate ‘Trickle Down’ Analogy

Lewis Black Has The Ultimate ‘Trickle Down’ Analogy


100 Comments on "Lewis Black Has The Ultimate ‘Trickle Down’ Analogy"


  1. I don't even know why the rich subscribe trickle down economics? it defies logic….if you give the money to the people who don't need it they will just put it with the rest of the Gold and it does nothing, helps no one,

    On the other hand if you give it to people on low/middle incomes, what will they do with it? they have plenty of needs so they SPEND it!!

    That creates demand, demand creates supply…..and guess who controls supply? yes….the wealthy!……

    So the poor get money to spend, that creates Jobs which means more people paying Taxes so the Government gets more in it's coffers than it handed out in the first Place….and where does the money finish up? with the rich who control the supply!…..

    So the Rich win, the poor win, Workers win……and even the Government wins! There are no losers……….
    With Trickle down economics only the Rich get anything…..and they don't get anywhere near as much as they would if they gave it to the poor first……Water trickles down hill…..Money does the opposite….it trickles (FLOWS)uphill!!

    Trickle down economics makes the cake smaller……….if you go the other way you make the cake bigger….and there is enough for every one to have 2 or 3 slices…..it ain't rocket science….

    It wouldn't matter if you gave it all to the wealthy they will not employ one person for 10 minutes if they do not have a demand to meet………Wealthy people are not the Red Cross or the Salvos……they won't employ people to sit on their arse if they don't have work for them…..how can anyone possibly think giving the rich a Tax cut will mean they will employ people they don't need to do a Job they don't have?……if they have work they will employ people, if they don't they won't,

    Reply

  2. "Trickle down-" another one of those two-word expressions in which both words mean their antonyms.

    Reply

  3. There's also a trickle down effect when I go to the toilet pull my pants down and take huge dump.

    Reply

  4. Go to a poor man, ask him for a job, leftists amaze me, na, arrogance is jus part of the human condition. Luis is free to do with what's left of his money, after taxes.what ever he likes, who would universal poverty serve?

    Reply

  5. Either pay the band to use the actual song, or pick an entirely different song. That was a rather annoying few seconds of pure hell. lol

    Reply

  6. This old prick used to be funny. Now? fodder for progs, trogs and libs. He should watch vids of Rickles and John Pinette to learn or relearn….and…….here they come folks:_____________

    Reply

  7. "If a man in his fifties has a six-pack, you know something is f****ng wrong!", – Colbert. You made Lewis crack-up!

    Reply

  8. Trickledown is 30 40 years old. It was proposed as proof of why we should all send our retirement to the stockmarket because that we we'd all be rich. Right. Work well for you? The only one in my company that didnt lose THOUSANDS WAS ME. i knew better. 99.99% SUCKERS. .01% Smart people. trump. 99.99% morons. .01% didnt vote. Its getting suckass smelling all over this trump feces pile with hair. Crap with feet. Morons in a massive moron pile. Epic moron pile. trump…..

    Reply

  9. ROFL A 50 year old man with a six pack, something is *bleep* wrong.
    Throw away lined like that are the reason I watch.
    Keep up the good work boys.

    Reply

  10. For almost 40 years, the Republicans have gotten drunk on beer, peed their pants, and most of us haven’t gotten anything, except for a couple of drops of pee in a cheap plastic cup. Great analogy Lewis Black.

    Reply

  11. That analogy is spot on. Most of it stays at the 'top' and then it evaporate. But it will still stink!

    Reply

  12. Taking whomever's pussy you want when you want to take it is the whole, original point of seeking power.

    We're ruled by the inbred descendants of violent rapists, in other words.
    And yes, inbred. Every new population of elites makes the same stupid mistake of believing they deserve their wealth and status by virtue of merely existing, that they are some how inherently different and better. Can't be mingling one's "natural superiority" with any but other elites, always a small population at best. Only exceptionally beautiful or "talented" (read ruthless) poor people are occasionally allowed to break the surface

    Reply

  13. Trickle down economics is nothing but rich people pissing on the heads of middle class and poor, and telling them they should be happy when their socks get wet!!

    Reply

  14. If government is the best distributor of wealth which I think these two are agreeing to here, then Lewis Black and Stephen Colbert don't have to take the tax cut they had been given if they disagree with it. They can simply pay the same percentage of taxes as they did before the new tax plan since we all know trickle down doesn't work. Are Lewis & Stephen giving their tax cut to charity or are they keeping it? They never said. They blame the republicans though.

    Reply

  15. Please don,t trickle on my back and call it rain. It did not work when Reagan and the Bushes did it and it will fail again.

    Reply

  16. If you're against trickle down for god's sake vote for Bernie. He's the only candidate who wants to change it.

    Reply

  17. Lewis is the current George Carlin……mostly agree with everything he says. Nice that a guy can get up and bash American standards and traditions. We need to change with the times but we don't. So we will be left behind. Then thank the cave people who support trup and that backwards kind of thinking. Move on folks. Think, get educated. Lead the free world once more. Help others instead of being pissed at people who need a helping hand.

    Reply

  18. For every ($1) dollar spent lobbying. Big corporations get $770 back. N most of that money is spent on republicans. So it’s a win win for everyone except the American people.

    Reply

  19. Mr. David Stockman has said that supply-side economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic policy—what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: 'If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.'

    Reply

  20. I love trickledown economics, and there are few people further down than me.

    Why the hell do leftists think basically every republican must be a millionaire??? I can’t work this out.

    Reply

  21. Trickle down economics ??? Hope you like the taste of piss because thats what will be trickling down to us 99% 😂😂😂😋

    Reply

  22. Does trickle down affect the biggest employer in America? Yes it does but the soldiers will never benefit from it.

    Reply

  23. What trickles down from the wealthy to the poor might be golden but it ain't gold.

    Reply

  24. Well for sure none of Black's money nor Colbert's money trickles down. Nor do any of the millions from all the celebrity freaks in the entertainment cult.

    Reply

  25. I can only speak from personal experience.

    Literally all of the conservatives I know don't trust the federal government because they believe the human nature is fundamentally flawed and prone to selfishness and greed.

    It's not a surprise that most of them are "religious."

    Yet, when it comes down to economic policies, they choose to believe that those who directly reap the benefits of capitalism are somehow immune to the selfishness and greed and are more than happy to share those benefits with those who work for them.

    Does it sound right?

    Reply

  26. They both claim to be Americans. That’s not possible. The are far left socialistic communists. In other words democrats.

    Reply

  27. wait a minute… album? My spell check doesn't even know what that is. How many record players still in use nowadays? Hopefully you get a free digital download of it.

    Reply

  28. Trickle down should mean grants and federal loans to start businesses and/or pay your employees well. Such that they earn enough to band together and start a competing business run better due to employees leaning a better way to run their business. That or we tax both corporate and personal earnings of over paid execs 90% for new start up funding that does the right thing for employees. 20x should be he high end, perhaps lower, for large corp execs to make more than their average employee.

    Furthermore, there should be no profit motive for health, legal, political, and military related issues. Solvent companies don't need handouts plus skip paying taxes (the bad socialism ruing nations from the top down; aka corporate welfare for the rich). When has it become that ducking taxes, especially when highly profitable, is the american dream?  Greed is an addiction that destroys societies. Democratic socialism overseeing a well regulated capitalism based society, whether more or less governing, is the only way for humanity to not only survive but thrive.

    Reply

  29. I'm getting really sick of Brit trash on my Spanish colonial lawn every morning like I'm ignorant of history, staring into deadlights and throwing away my money on marketing scams and disinformation gambit. What are we f'ing blind? I don't like the British or trust them, especially pirates. I better not be digging in an empty grave marked "unknown.". I don't need thear Jones-Martinez gambit after what I just experienced…or Irish baseball scams running secret intelligence…I trust these esoteric non-German white people like a marketing mailer filled with Anthrax.

    Reply

  30. Senator Tom Harkin, an old farm boy, had the best analogy for "trickle down" economics. It was like feeding the birds by giving the horse more hay.

    Reply

  31. I don't know about you, but to the very best of my knowledge, I've never been employed by a poor person.
    Some people have more because they work harder than others.
    The big problem with Socialism is, eventually you run out of other people's money.
    Capitalism is not perfect…nothing is.
    But it is ultimately the most fair system.
    KEEP AMERICA GREAT
    TRUMP 2020🤪

    Reply

  32. I can understand giving it a shot. I voted for Reagan for exactly that reason….let's give this a shot. But it hasn't delivered broad based prosperity, or paid for itself either.
    That's not opinion, it's fact. We have decades of results that indicate it's been good for Wall Street, but lousy for Main Street.

    Remember, when proposed, it was done so as theory only. From after WWII through the 70's, the period in which we experienced relatively broad based prosperity, it sure as hell wasn't due to anything remotely resembling trickle down.

    With decades of data that makes it easy for any person to understand cause and effect, it's foolish to continue trying it.

    It's like trying to pound a square peg through a round hole. It has never worked as advertised. Getting a bigger hammer isn't going to make it work.

    Reply

  33. The level of economic ignorance in these comments is pretty astounding. A few points worth mentioning here that no one seems to be pointing out:

    1. There is no such theory as "trickle-down" economics. No conservative or Republican has ever proposed such a theory. It's a strawman. "Trickle-down" economics doesn't work in the same way that unicorn economics, fairy godmother economics, and moon pie economics don't work. Non-existent economic theories typically don't work because there's…no such thing as them.

    2. Believe it or not, all of the investment dollars that create, fund, and maintain the economy's capital structure have to…like…come from somewhere.

    Reply

  34. The absolute worst Led Zep cover intro ever. Muzak does a better 'The Ocean' than the band did. That was nothing short of embarrassing for the 'band'.

    Reply

  35. There are some hungry people, Quick! Give Some Food to the Rich so That When They Poop the Poor Can Eat The Undigested Food From Their Excrement!
    Hurry!

    Reply

  36. Has anyone ever seen Lewis Black and Warren Buffet together at the same time?
    I say it’s one person tricking us

    Reply

  37. The myth of "trickle down" economics needs to be debunked such that the proponents can no longer sell it for the snake oil that it is. I'm no expert, but I will attempt to do so using the types of examples and reasoning that I've seen in favor if it (not including the tirades about leftists being stupid and throwing around insults, which seems to be the majority, but rather the ones that attempt to use logic). And sorry for the wall-o-text, but I don't like making short, "F** you, libturd snowflake cuck!" statements as my arguments.
    Let's take a scenario as given:
    In a country like the United States, a tax brake is given to the wealthy and big businesses with the assumption that those people/organizations will pay it forward in the form of investments into R&D for more products, pay raises for the workers, better benefits, expansion and new hires, or other methods, and make it more appealing to bring back the money many of them had been hiding in offshore accounts (to protect their assets from taxation). More, it is assumed that the wealthy who immediately benefit from the break will put more money into the economy by buying luxury goods, the production of which would protect/create more jobs. Any money that doesn't directly go into any of those things would get invested by banks.
    Let's look at what happened:
    In a situation like we saw with these tax cuts, only a handful of businesses even suggest that they will do any of those things, but when it comes out that most did not, the public outcry forces many more to join in under fear of losing business. The actual wage growth that results is flagging at best, and doesn't keep up with inflation or, more importantly, the costs of living; COL keep going up for various reasons, but wages do not, and the token increase by those who kept their word were not enough to make up the difference. Businesses who were used as evidence of success for investing in job growth by expanding business or increasing hires had, in fact, declared their intent before the tax break was even suggested, which means that their efforts SHOULD have scaled higher because of the breaks; they did not. Stock buybacks were the name of the game for businesses, putting the wealth they had been hiding, as well as the savings from the break, into the upper crust of their organizations, including investors; most people who need the most reprieve cannot afford to pay their bills without giving up things like a healthy, steady diet, or without taking on 2, 3, even 4 jobs, and so are unable to participate in the stock market in a meaningful way. In short, businesses did not do their part as described by the idea of "trickle down" economics. They just kept up business as usual. Their offshore funds did not make it back into circulation. No pro-worker changes in the wage gap were made. No significant number of jobs were created from the break, particularly with livable wages.
    Individuals who benefit may have decided to buy that new luxury car, boat, airplane, or house. That fact did not put more people to work, nor did it ensure the continued employment of the existing workers, or create significant demand for extra goods or services; those markets were always a small part of the industries to which they belonged, and never provided a meaningful amount of employment. They did not buy their new car/boat/plane as a custom job unless they were obscenely wealthy (in which case the tax break wouldn't have made a difference one way or the other), which means that there wasn't a sudden demand for more parts or labor; the products were already produced as part of the normal operation of the business, which produces those items regardless of whether or not there is a tax break.
    The lack of a significant increase in the contribution of individuals plays into the lack of significant contributions made by businesses. If the demand for luxury goods, which are only demanded by the ultra wealthy, does not increase exponentially, then the supply will likewise not increase exponentially, or even significantly, because they are already able to meet those demands with their current business model. And since the demand for products that the majority of the populace can afford does not increase with the tax break that barely registers to them, if at all, production, and therefore increases in new hires, expansion, wages, and benefits remain exactly where they were projected to be without the break.
    Given the scenario and the observed (and documented) results, "trickle down" economics is proven to not work as advertised. That's not "leftist stupidity making things up and unable to see reality," but actual reality being so glaringly obvious that it cannot be denied. Wage growth among the majority has not kept up with their productivity. That is well known, and well documented. That wasn't going to change with a tax break or any amount of deregulation. It was deregulation that led to the shortfall, yet many refuse to accept it. Again, I am no expert, but the facts are there for all to see, and it doesn't take an expert to see that what was promised never came to pass. It takes mental gymnastics to argue that it worked the way it was supposed to, and that it was in any way to the benefit of the nation as a whole, of which the ultra wealthy are but a small part.
    You can argue all you like that businesses that don't invest in their workers are still benefiting them through money getting invested by the banks they store it in, or some other method, but the reality is that the workers don't benefit in a meaningful way. They can't afford a better diet, they can't afford to drop one or two jobs, and they still can't pay their bills without relying on payday loan scams. The middle class workers are not spending more, which means that more goods and services are not being demanded, which means that, over all, the economy is stagnating regardless of the stock market (which is not the economy). The real driver of economic growth is not the elite, but the demands of the masses. That's been proven time and again over thousands of years. The wealthy do not create jobs without a demand for what those jobs provide, and people do not demand what those jobs provide if they don't have the capital to spare on them. That means that a healthy economy does not see almost all of its wealth in the hands of a very few, but rather see it spread out more. Not by redistribution laws, but by businesses being responsible to their employees and paying them according to productivity, as well as the success of the business. The owners/operators can rake in a hefty sum and still fulfill that responsibility. We've seen it before in just the history of this country. Anyone who tries to sell the myth of "trickle down" economics as anything but a scam is either benefiting directly from it and will obviously defend their cash cow to the death, or else is so blinded by the bling of "capitalism" and chest thumping that they would probably buy and drink from a bottle labeled "jizz milked from the balls of Capitalism itself, mixed with American flags from the good old days, and declared 'the ultimate beverage that fills you with patriot-jism' by George Washington." There's just no other way to describe people who have access to all of the combined knowledge of humanity (obviously, sans the top secret stuff, and the recipe for that secret sauce), yet refuse to use it properly to find out about the world they live in, instead falling for blatant BS that makes them feel better while they cut off their noses to spite their faces.
    Key phrases to research:
    "wage gap 1900 to present workers to CEOs"
    "wage stagnation 1948 to present"
    "minimum wage vs inflation"
    "cost of living vs wage growth"

    Reply

  38. Hey, man, those are Microsoft TM "Christians" and "Conquistador" Apples TM with laptops and televisions. They're the creepiest thing around. We have to run "Christianity" by law, but…
    They can't see the "Greek" Linux monsters taking over near Egypt. LOL, hey, they may be solved for Heraclitus…and this may involve credit for cash takeovers eventually. Serious. Some hackers may go computer "Confederacy."

    Reply

  39. Lewis Black's analogy about 'trickle-down' economics is the best EVER. It reall is a piss-poor theory!

    Reply

  40. Can you imagine walking in to a room and seeing a fat repulsive slob like harvey weinstein naked with a raging hardon, and he’s comin for YOU? (No pun intended). The brain says run, the body says hurl. Which do you do???

    Reply

  41. The way I see that analogy is the rich drink the fresh beer, piss their pants and we get the piss. Just my opinion tho

    Reply

  42. Don't see Lewis Black sharing his wealth and trickling some down to the poor. He's just another celebrity rich liberal telling others to do what they won't. Just like Colbert who also doesn't share his wealth.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *