Customers.
Whenever some Republican yahoo complains about raising marginal tax rates, or about "class warfare," just say that one word. (Picture from Bluemooncandles.)
Customers.
No business can make money without customers. Luxury goods don't have many customers. Middle class goods have a lot more. When you have something the whole market can buy, that's when you make the big money. Wal-Mart will always be bigger than Tiffany's.
Customers.
The Obama plan is aimed at creating more customers for what the rich are investing in, and what everyone in that class makes. Customers are what sales, earnings and tiny little dividends are made of.
Customers.
If you make $1 million and you're at the top of the pyramid and you are taxed at 40%, you pay $400,000 in taxes. And you think, that's not good.
But at the same time we lower tax rates on customers, those customers go out and buy the stuff you're making, the stuff you invest in, and next year you make $2 million. If you're an investor, this may take no extra effort. Plus the value of your assets goes up. OK, now you owe $800,000, but you've got $1.2 million to spent, tax-free, something it would take you a tax rate of 20% to earn otherwise.
Customers.
The more customers there are, the more money they make, the more money you make. This is a basic law of the market. When, why, and how did we forget that? Why is this story not being told by the media? Is it because all the people on the TeeVee are making over $250,000? Well, guess what, Sparky. If there are more customers, and more ads, and more competition for ad space, you'll make more than $250,000 next year.
Spread the word. It's not about class warfare. It's not about leveling incomes. It's about creating more and better customers for what rich people make and invest in.
That's how things worked out in the 1990s. Things can be that way again.
But only if we leave behind this nonsense that economics is always a zero-sum game, and remember that what drives true wealth is a solid base of customers for what rich people make and invest in.
Just remember the magic word.
Customers.
I know why we’ve forgotten that. It’s because all my adult life we’ve been referring to “Consumers” rather than to “Customers.” Consumers gobble up our substance. Customers buy.
The Chinese were totally right about Rectification of Names, at least to make them conform more closely to reality!
I know why we’ve forgotten that. It’s because all my adult life we’ve been referring to “Consumers” rather than to “Customers.” Consumers gobble up our substance. Customers buy.
The Chinese were totally right about Rectification of Names, at least to make them conform more closely to reality!
Just to be clear, I agree with your general argument. However, the beginning part is a bit off because you are conflating revenues with profits. You claim Walmart will always be bigger than Tiffany’s, but that doesn’t mean that they will have more money. Look at how Porsche just bought VW. That said, I think we can agree that the optimal situation for customers is one where the only way to maximize profits is to maximize revenues (ie true market competition). So, we should not be against skewing things in favor of this situation. This means Antitrust and progressive taxation.
Just to be clear, I agree with your general argument. However, the beginning part is a bit off because you are conflating revenues with profits. You claim Walmart will always be bigger than Tiffany’s, but that doesn’t mean that they will have more money. Look at how Porsche just bought VW. That said, I think we can agree that the optimal situation for customers is one where the only way to maximize profits is to maximize revenues (ie true market competition). So, we should not be against skewing things in favor of this situation. This means Antitrust and progressive taxation.