General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe republican mantra makes about as much sense as giving a bicycle to a fish.
How can they say with a straight face that if they make huge tax cuts to the wealthy, but they say to everyone else, how can that possibly shrink the deficit??
Less money collected in taxes cannot pay down the deficit. Impossible to do.
This is the garbage they are trying to tell people will be great for the country.
Same thing on a smaller scale:
If I make less money, I cannot grow my savings account. No way, no how, can't happen.
The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)and is spent on imported luxury goods, auction purchases, real estate and country club memberships. These things create no new jobs or anything else.
Orrex
(63,201 posts)Where they let it sit until they can repatriate it tax-free under some future Republican administration.
Anyone in the 99% who believes in "trickle down economics," after nearly 40 years of proven failure, is a hopeless idiot and should be confined for their own protection.
BSdetect
(8,998 posts)And ignorance.
WyattKansas
(1,648 posts)And I explain that the only possible reason for them to make their arguments is to game the system somehow to benefit them at everyone's expense.
For some reason most people seem too confused to think about it logically... Which only leaves me thinking that we are totally fucked in this country and something is very wrong with people. It starts to feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone.
0rganism
(23,943 posts)in order to justify tax cuts in the same paragraph as deficit reduction, they claim taxes (and other regulations) are such a burden on individuals and corporations that if reduced, the overall take will increase due to magical correlated gains in economic activity and internal investment.
the fact that they have no evidence for such assertions is rarely explored by the newsmedia.
jmowreader
(50,553 posts)Republican Holy Writ states that cutting taxes will put the money back into the economy, where it can be spent on things that will increase taxable revenues.
This is like telling an Amway prospect, "you will get rich just by purchasing things from your own business." Which is something you're told. In reality, the few people making bank in Amway are the ones who have huge organizations to sell seminars and training tapes to.
You COULD increase revenues by cutting taxes, but you'd have to do something so politically unacceptable not even the GOP would try it: you would have to give the entire tax cut to one person - someone capable of inventing a new mousetrap and running the company that makes it. If you spread the money out like tax cuts do, there's not enough in one place to really do anything.
Dave Starsky
(5,914 posts)You, like me and anyone else who's taken even a high-school-level economics class, have a keen grasp of the obvious.
Supply-side, "trickle-down" economics was a ridiculous idea when Reagan presented it, and it is a ridiculous idea now. Even Reagan's economic advisor disavowed it, eventually
The last 37 years have really served as a laboratory for the trickle-down theory, since this is the way this country has been operating ever since. To steal a paraphrase from Ronald Reagan, "Are you better off now, economically, than you were 40 years ago?" Having been around long enough to be able to answer that question, the answer is an emphatic NO.