• @[email protected]
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    If I make a house that sells for a billion dollars, someone with a 900 million dollar house will buy it, and their 900 million dollar home will be bought by someone in an 875 million dollar home, ND that continues all the way down.

    No amount of emotional appeal beats supply and demand. I’ll take new housing anywhere and anyway I can get it

      • @[email protected]
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        I absolutely know what I’m talking about, and it isn’t “trickle down” b cause it doesn’t involve any additional mechanics other than an increase in supply in a market defined by a massive shortage in supply.

        Also rent seeking doesn’t mean what you think it means.

          • @[email protected]
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Lots of things sound similar. Socialized costs and socialism sound similar, and are not similar at all.

            You not understanding the concepts or criticism of “trickle down economics” just means you shouldn’t use it as a comparison until you learn more about it, and why it fails.

            As a tip, the principal difference is that TDE assumes that cutting taxes for the wealthy will inherently result in business reinvestment, when it clearly does not. This does not rule out all supply-side economics, as renewable energy subsidies and grants have clearly demonstrated. However, demand-side policies are also necessary at times, as in 08 or during COVID.

            Increasing supply does always change the supply/demand curve, and we have a massive shortage of supply in the housing market.