Opinion of Trickle-Down Economics

[Bo]

Also known as Supply-Side Economics.

Bad idea.

[k-onmmunist]

Good idea. Bad mental image.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Also known as Supply-Side Economics.

Bad idea.

seems too dogmatic, but it was accompanied by deregulation, decreasing funds for anti-poverty measures and those are the main things that i disagree with. Today not many economists r self identified supply siders.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

An absurd idea.

[JSojourner]

As I have posted before, and with apologies to Bruce Cockburn...


Picture on magazine boardroom pop star
Pinstripe prophet of peckerhead greed
You say Trust me with the money -- the keys to the universe
Trickle down will give us everything we need

Brand new century private penitentiary
Bank vault utopia padded for the few
And its tumors for the masses coughing for the masses
Earphones for the masses and they all serve you

Trickle down give em the business
Trickle down supposed to give us the goods
Cups held put to catch a bit of the bounty
Trickle down everywhere trickle down blood

What used to pass for education now looks more like ignoration
Take the peoples' money and slip it to the corporation
Yellow rain golden shower pesticide firepower
Summon feudal demons of sweatshop subjugation

Workfare foul air homeless beggars everywhere
Picturephone aristocrats lounge around the pool
Captains of industry smiling beneficently
Leaky hull supertanker ship of fools

Trickle down give em the business
Trickle down supposed to give us the goods
Cups held put to catch a bit of the bounty
Trickle down everywhere trickle down blood

Takeover takedown big buck shakedown
Schoolyard pusher of the anything-for-profit
First got to privatize then you get to piratize
Hooked on avarice how do we get off it?

Trickle down give em the business
Trickle down supposed to give us the goods
Cups held put to catch a bit of the bounty
Trickle down everywhere trickle down blood

[Frodo]

The only idea worse than this is communism. 

[Vepres]

Back when the top rate was 70%, yeah, it was a good idea. With taxes under 40% as they are now, we have the maximum benefit of trickle-down. You could probably have them higher even without disrupting the "trickle-down".

[Deldem]

Ineffective, awful idea.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Good idea. Bad mental image.

[Conservative frontier]

Good when Reagan used it. Bad now.

[You kip if you want to...]

An incredibly stupid idea.

[fezzyfestoon]

BS

[Mechaman]

Certainly better than trickle-up economics.

Unless it's yo momma.

[James L. Buckley]

Back when the top rate was 70%, yeah, it was a good idea. With taxes under 40% as they are now, we have the maximum benefit of trickle-down. You could probably have them higher even without disrupting the "trickle-down".

I agree, when taxes were 70% and above as they were under the Reagan years, you do see a large benefit from cutting them. Same thing happened with the Kennedy Tax Cut in the 1960's, which was only curtailed by President Johnson's raising of taxes in 1966. That sort of thing doesn't really work anymore with taxes barely below the 40% mark today however.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Back when the top rate was 70%, yeah, it was a good idea. With taxes under 40% as they are now, we have the maximum benefit of trickle-down. You could probably have them higher even without disrupting the "trickle-down".

     That's probably true, though I think it might be more accurate to describe it as excessively high taxes causing an exodus of the wealthy than the cutting of the taxes freeing up their wealth.

[opebo]

I don't really need to comment, except to note that the american electorate always keeps voting for this!

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I don't really need to comment, except to note that the american electorate always keeps voting for this!

No they don't.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I don't really need to comment, except to note that the american electorate always keeps voting for this!

No they don't.

yes they do!!!

[Bo]

I don't really need to comment, except to note that the american electorate always keeps voting for this!

No they don't.

yes they do!!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[TeePee4Prez]

I don't really need to comment, except to note that the american electorate always keeps voting for this!

No they don't.

yes they do!!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^6

But then again once put into effect, the suburban Northeast turned from GOP to Dem.  The GOP primarily won so handily pre-Reagan solely on taxes.

[Bo]

I don't really need to comment, except to note that the american electorate always keeps voting for this!

No they don't.

yes they do!!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^6

But then again once put into effect, the suburban Northeast turned from GOP to Dem.  The GOP primarily won so handily pre-Reagan solely on taxes.

I agree with you, and I think that the GOP's embrace of trickle-down economics was definitely a factor. Many Republicans from the Northeast opposed trickle-down economics before Reagan, but then once they all started to support it, many Democrats began winning their seats over the next 30 years.

[KeeptheChange]

A good idea that was never carried far enough.  While I consider the Libertarians to be close allies of mine when it comes to dismantling government, I do support major tax breaks for both the wealthy and for business.  When we take care of those who employ the rest of us, they in turn, take care of us.  Also, then tend to use the money awarded them via tax cuts or business grants/abatements, etc. to create new wealth.

The liberal model, though honorably intentioned, is to let wealth trickle up.  The Robin Hood approach has never worked and it never will.  Just look at how the New Deal prolonged the recession and accomplished nothing positive.  Ever since that gigantic fiasco, indolent Americans have become addicted to handouts.

[Bo]

A good idea that was never carried far enough.  While I consider the Libertarians to be close allies of mine when it comes to dismantling government, I do support major tax breaks for both the wealthy and for business.  When we take care of those who employ the rest of us, they in turn, take care of us.  Also, then tend to use the money awarded them via tax cuts or business grants/abatements, etc. to create new wealth.

The liberal model, though honorably intentioned, is to let wealth trickle up.  The Robin Hood approach has never worked and it never will.  Just look at how the New Deal prolonged the recession and accomplished nothing positive.  Ever since that gigantic fiasco, indolent Americans have become addicted to handouts.

I strongly disagree with the bolded parts.

[JSojourner]

A good idea that was never carried far enough.  While I consider the Libertarians to be close allies of mine when it comes to dismantling government, I do support major tax breaks for both the wealthy and for business.  When we take care of those who employ the rest of us, they in turn, take care of us.  Also, then tend to use the money awarded them via tax cuts or business grants/abatements, etc. to create new wealth.

The liberal model, though honorably intentioned, is to let wealth trickle up.  The Robin Hood approach has never worked and it never will.  Just look at how the New Deal prolonged the recession and accomplished nothing positive.  Ever since that gigantic fiasco, indolent Americans have become addicted to handouts.

I strongly disagree with the bolded parts.

Bold that entire load of steaming monkey dookie and I will concur!

[Earth]

Complete horseshit.