Why is trickle-down economics still with us?

But why has the public been repeatedly willing to go along with trickle-down economics when nothing ever trickles down? What accounts for the collective amnesia?

The answer is that the moneyed interests have also invested a portion of their gains in an intellectual infrastructure of economists and pundits who continue to promote this failed doctrine – along with institutions that house them, such as, in the US, the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute and Club for Growth.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/09/why-is-trickle-down-economics-still-with-us
 
Because it is false. Nice try, as usual, pretending that you're not a right wing stooge.

Like a typical partisan, you won't bother to research the issue because you are afraid your stereotypes might not be true. It is easy to find the truth, but I think you are more interested in having a good argument than learning the truth.

You are the same as some of the right-wingers I was recently debating who claimed the January 6 riots did not stop the electoral vote count. I pointed out several sources to prove him wrong but he was not interested in the truth because it deprived him of some of his arguments.

You are more interested in labeling people right or left than learning anything--a binary thinker.
 
I ignore posts with pictures.

A picture version of BP's response:

image_large
 
Like a typical partisan, you won't bother to research the issue because you are afraid your stereotypes might not be true. It is easy to find the truth, but I think you are more interested in having a good argument than learning the truth.

You are the same as some of the right-wingers I was recently debating who claimed the January 6 riots did not stop the electoral vote count. I pointed out several sources to prove him wrong but he was not interested in the truth because it deprived him of some of his arguments.

You are more interested in labeling people right or left than learning anything--a binary thinker.

Seriously, you push that stupid idea and think you're original.
 
Seriously, you push that stupid idea and think you're original.

No, I'm not original at all. It is not my data. It comes from the IRS and Treasury Department. They have incomes and taxes ranked by quintile.

There are millions of people making a $1 million or more. Having a few ultra rich examples who pay no taxes is not an accurate description of the millions of others who pay most of the country's federal income taxes. People like Buffet or Musk probably get very little of their income from a salary meaning they pay income taxes on capital gains or some other source.
 
No, I'm not original at all. It is not my data. It comes from the IRS and Treasury Department. They have incomes and taxes ranked by quintile.

There are millions of people making a $1 million or more. Having a few ultra rich examples who pay no taxes is not an accurate description of the millions of others who pay most of the country's federal income taxes. People like Buffet or Musk probably get very little of their income from a salary meaning they pay income taxes on capital gains or some other source.

that's nice
 
that's nice

Nice, but obviously too much work for you to look at the data to get rid of your misconceptions.

Saying you want the rich to pay more taxes is an opinion, saying they don't pay their "fair share" now is just incorrect. First, "fair share" has to be defined.
 
Nice, but obviously too much work for you to look at the data to get rid of your misconceptions.

Saying you want the rich to pay more taxes is an opinion, saying they don't pay their "fair share" now is just incorrect. First, "fair share" has to be defined.

Listen, you cited no sources. Quit wasting my time.
 
Ever since Reagan and Thatcher first tried them, trickle-down policies have exploded budget deficits and widened inequality. At best, they’ve temporarily increased consumer demand (the opposite of what’s needed during high inflation that Britain and much of the world are experiencing).

Reagan’s tax cuts and deregulation at the start of the 1980s were not responsible for America’s rapid growth through the late 1980s. His exorbitant spending (mostly on national defense) fueled a temporary boom that ended in a fierce recession. The Donald Trump White House’s tax cut never trickled down.

Yet the US never restored the highest marginal tax rates before Reagan, and deregulation – especially of financial markets – is a continuing legacy.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/09/why-is-trickle-down-economics-still-with-us

Why is trickle-down economics still with us?

Why are Republicans still among us?
 
Failed Republican economic policies are still with us because they provide a short term (as well as short-sighted) benefit to the corporate oligarchs who control the party.


The tiny few who benefit have become absolutely brilliant at dangling the rank-and-file Joe Sixpack Republicans by the strings.
It's actually chilling to observe, with the millions of certifiable idiots voting in 180° opposition to their own best interests.
 
No, I'm not original at all. It is not my data. It comes from the IRS and Treasury Department. They have incomes and taxes ranked by quintile.

There are millions of people making a $1 million or more. Having a few ultra rich examples who pay no taxes is not an accurate description of the millions of others who pay most of the country's federal income taxes. People like Buffet or Musk probably get very little of their income from a salary meaning they pay income taxes on capital gains or some other source.

Looking at the income tax alone ignores about 50% of federal revenues.

But then you also need to look at the tax rate on different kinds of income.
Someone with no wage income making $500,000 on income in Capital gains is paying $70,847 in federal income taxes.
Someone making $250,000 in wages is paying $83,387 in income tax and FICA taxes. ($96,300 if you include the employers FICA.)

The top 1% of taxpayers while it makes 20% of the total income in the US may pay 40% of the income taxes but that accounts for only about 20% of Federal revenues. Be careful how you use the numbers. There are sources that include percent of all taxes paid. They are a better choice if you want to talk about who pays what.
 
Ever since Reagan and Thatcher first tried them, trickle-down policies have exploded budget deficits and widened inequality. At best, they’ve temporarily increased consumer demand (the opposite of what’s needed during high inflation that Britain and much of the world are experiencing).

Reagan’s tax cuts and deregulation at the start of the 1980s were not responsible for America’s rapid growth through the late 1980s. His exorbitant spending (mostly on national defense) fueled a temporary boom that ended in a fierce recession. The Donald Trump White House’s tax cut never trickled down.

Yet the US never restored the highest marginal tax rates before Reagan, and deregulation – especially of financial markets – is a continuing legacy.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/09/why-is-trickle-down-economics-still-with-us

The government isn't the economy, dumbass. Redefinition fallacy.
 
Because people like Stone don't have a clue about economics.
You are describing yourself again.
If trickle down/supply side economics worked, we would not have seen a massive widening of the wage and wealth gap.
There is no such thing. Buzzword fallacy.
It is literally proof that trickle down does not work. And we have gone so far down that rabbit hole that only a wealth tax will set a baseline from which we can correct the disparity.
Communism doesn't work.
People like Stone have been duped by the rich guys into believing that it's the fault of lazy black people.
Racism.
And deep down he believes that because he, like his fellow Trumptards, is an ignorant racist.
You are describing yourself again.
 
Back
Top