Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 162 posts

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#21

Post by Florin_Andrei »

mikestew wrote: post #4

Perhaps I'm having a Mandela Effect moment, but hasn't "trickle down" been debunked before this study...repeatedly? Not just "no shit", but actual studies and stuff? Regardless, Will Rogers is credited with the phrase "trickle down" to refer to supply-side economics, so it has gone on longer than 50 years. Mr. Rogers also did not mean the turn of phrase to be complimentary.

> hasn't "trickle down" been debunked before this study...repeatedly? Not just "no shit", but actual studies and stuff?

Regardless, it's still the central dogma of the politics of a large part of population.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#22

Post by Florin_Andrei »

ardy42 wrote: post #18
pmiller2 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has, but half the country still hasn't gotten that message.

> It has, but half the country still hasn't gotten that message. That's at least partially because the wealthy have the means to hire lots of smart people to create sophisticatedly misleading propaganda for them, and make sure it's widely disseminated and influential.

Social media may turn out to be part of the explanation for the Great Filter.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#23

Post by Florin_Andrei »

eloff wrote: post #17

I'm really curious how many of our democracies fail in this specific case. There aren't a lot of wealthy people, so if politicians are pandering to the majority, this is the wrong call. It's well known not to work for a long time, so logically it's also the wrong call. Are most politicians wealthy? Is that why they seem to overly protect the interests of this group over the rest of the population? Straight up self-in…

> if politicians are pandering to the majority, this is the wrong call

Unless you somehow convince the majority to vote in a way that is clearly harmful to them, but useful to you and your clique. Then you only need to be "pandering" to their engineered beliefs, even re-enforce them while you're at it. Which of course is exactly what's happening.

> It's well known not to work for a long time

It only needs to last for the active career span of the politician.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#24

Post by konfusinomicon »

Now that the rich are used to lower taxes, if the government raises them won't the extra costs they incur just end up being passed down to the consumer via higher cost of goods/services from the businesses owned by said rich people?

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#25

Post by pmoriarty »

imtringued wrote: post #13
mikestew wrote: post #4

Perhaps I'm having a Mandela Effect moment, but hasn't "trickle down" been debunked before this study...repeatedly? Not just "no shit", but actual studies and stuff? Regardless, Will Rogers is credited with the phrase "trickle down" to refer to supply-side economics, so it has gone on longer than 50 years. Mr. Rogers also did not mean the turn of phrase to be complimentary.

It's just an excuse to justify selfish tax policy that favors the wealthy. It obviously doesn't work because the wealthy don't have to invest into domestic jobs. They can also use their money abroad. If you give them more money they are just going to spend more of it outside your country. The opposite is also true. The vast majority of consumers spend their money domestically. Yes the products they buy are often impo…

"It obviously doesn't work because the wealthy don't have to invest into domestic jobs. They can also use their money abroad."

They can also just hoard most of it and pass it on to their descendants -- this is how you get dynasties. Tax havens and creatively constructed foundations are another way of making sure the government never gets ahold of their money.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#26

Post by commandlinefan »

Someone wrote: post #5
mikestew wrote: post #4

Perhaps I'm having a Mandela Effect moment, but hasn't "trickle down" been debunked before this study...repeatedly? Not just "no shit", but actual studies and stuff? Regardless, Will Rogers is credited with the phrase "trickle down" to refer to supply-side economics, so it has gone on longer than 50 years. Mr. Rogers also did not mean the turn of phrase to be complimentary.

Indeed. Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics ) say he used it in 1932, and says the idea is even older (“leak through” in 1896; “If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.” in the 1890s)

> If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows

Funny enough in that analogy: you're feeding the horse because you care about its well-being and it's doing something helpful in return, whereas the sparrows are actually a nuisance providing no value to anybody and just taking without giving anything in return.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#27

Post by Florin_Andrei »

FilterSweep wrote: post #9
pkaye wrote: post #6

Wouldn't trickle up economics work better? Poor people have more unmet needs and more likely to spend any extra they get into the economy.

That’s effectively what Nick Hanauer has been saying more recently but I believe we are too far gone at this stage.

> I believe we are too far gone at this stage

When irrationality and straight-up lying are so entrenched, you wonder what it would take to shake up the system.

The only thing I see is some major catastrophe, like a meteor strike or something on that scale.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#28

Post by aaomidi »

konfusinomicon wrote: post #24

Now that the rich are used to lower taxes, if the government raises them won't the extra costs they incur just end up being passed down to the consumer via higher cost of goods/services from the businesses owned by said rich people?

This is a good thing. In fact if this reduces consumption because higher priced we've won a major battle.

However wages have stagnated, which means whatever we've done so far hasn't helped consumers at the end. So at this point I'd take lower consumption as a win.

Re: 50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

#29

Post by Florin_Andrei »

slindz wrote: post #20
eloff wrote: post #17

I'm really curious how many of our democracies fail in this specific case. There aren't a lot of wealthy people, so if politicians are pandering to the majority, this is the wrong call. It's well known not to work for a long time, so logically it's also the wrong call. Are most politicians wealthy? Is that why they seem to overly protect the interests of this group over the rest of the population? Straight up self-in…

From my perspective, it costs an awful lot of money to run for office. If the only way to reach office is to convince wealthy people to fund your campaign, it shouldn't be a surprise if their interests wind up getting preferred treatment.

The way church and state are supposed to be separate (lots of potential comments here, but let's move on), we should have a separation of money and politics. And for reasons that are quite similar.

It's a public office, where public servants work, for the good of everyone, not for personal enrichment. It's a job just like all the others. It should not be a place where oceans of cash keep sloshing around.

No more lobbying. No more private funding of politics.

Post reply on HN