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

Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

lse.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 217 posts

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#61

Post by gamblor956 »

manlymuppet wrote: post #6

The thing I don't like about this is that it treats trickle-down economics as if it's something that needs to be debunked. Trickle-down economics has never been a real economic policy, and never been seriously advocated by federal policy-makers. It is an entirely pejorative term created by detractors of supply-side economics. The policies of supply-side economics, however, are much more defensible, but it seems peopl…

Trickle down economics is just another name for supply-side economics. They're one and the same. The difference is that the name "supply side economics" focuses on the the beneficiaries while the name "trickle down economics" focuses on the results.

Supply side economics owners claimed that benefits would "flow" down from the capital owners. The pejorative name "trickle-down economics" accurately reflects that the quantity of benefits that "flows" down to everyone else from those benefiting from massive tax cuts is a mere trickle of the money that the supply side saved from the tax cuts.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#62

Post by odo1242 »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #49

Take the inverse stance: take a country that taxes its citizens to death, like France or Belgium. How are they doing? Very badly. France is concerned that the IMF main jump in and take things under control because the government's public deficit is out of control. With a GDP of about $3.6 trillion (american trillion, not french) and public spending representing, officially, 57.2% of those $3.6 trillion, that's a cool…

You should include other countries for reference. The US has approximately 390x that amount of debt (only 5 times the population) and the average person is economically much worse off than all the European countries you just mentioned.

We literally spend more government money per person on healthcare than France does while having less public healthcare, precisely because of the "help the rich" policies causing most of that public money to go to subsidizing insurance companies.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#65

Post by smallmancontrov »

twoodfin wrote: post #43
smallmancontrov wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OBBB Opportunity Zones? Bonus depreciation? If you are unfamiliar with these or their applications to tax avoidance, you are outing yourself as a wagie running defense for your economic betters.

Sorry, which of those are capital gains rate cuts or tax hikes on workers?

Those are both capital tax cuts.

The hikes on labor come later, when the debt needs to be paid and Democrats are once again tricked into being fiscally responsible.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#66

Post by bena »

manlymuppet wrote: post #37
diabeetusman wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do %s/trickle-down/supply-side/g , then, if it's the term that's bothering you. Doesn't "debunking" trickle-down economics then, by extension, debunk supply-side economics? I'm not clear on the meaningful difference

I don't know regex, but to be clear: trickle-down economics and supply-side economics are very different things. I don't blame you for conflating them since they are intentionally very confusing. One is a policy and the other is basically the name of a common criticism for that policy. For example, the Cartesian circle does not refer to any of the many mathematical advancements Rene Descartes discovered. Instead, it'…

What's the actual difference, because you haven't actually supplied one. You've just said "They're different. One is a thing, and one is a criticism of a thing".

So, does the criticism not hold value? Because a large part of "supply-side economics", a term coined in the 70s, is reduction of taxes and regulations. With the idea that that extra capital will then be used to create jobs.

And if that is not what's happening, then I don't care about the semantics of whether or not "trickle-down" is the appropriate term of art to be applied here. The core concept of "giving rich people more money spurs job growth" is apparently false.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#67

Post by thegagne »

alistairSH wrote: post #28
manlymuppet wrote: post #6

The thing I don't like about this is that it treats trickle-down economics as if it's something that needs to be debunked. Trickle-down economics has never been a real economic policy, and never been seriously advocated by federal policy-makers. It is an entirely pejorative term created by detractors of supply-side economics. The policies of supply-side economics, however, are much more defensible, but it seems peopl…

You'd think so but not even a decade ago Kansas tried it again and it failed and the GOP continues to cut taxes for the wealthy and people keep electing them. Most of the nation (and world) never took any economics. This stuff is all magic or religion or whatever to them. Ronnie Raygun is as good as a saint to much of the US.

Non-typical Kansas voter here. I reviewed candidates and any mention of “cut taxes” is a hard no from me. I have kids, and I want to make sure their schools are fully funded. The only tax cuts I would support would be on essentials like food and clothing.

I also don’t like targeted new taxes, like taxing sports gambling and recreational drugs, because it unnecessarily entrenches those in our society. Even worse is when they earmark it, like using casino money to fund schools.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#68

Post by neilwilson »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #57
diob wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I intentionally referenced the Laffer curve. Essentially I think folks use it to only argue for less taxes, but I think it applies both ways.

Exactly: in political rhetoric, the Laffer Curve is 5% an honest examination of tax tradeoffs and 95% a trojan horse designed to smuggle into the conversation the assumption that we are on the "drowning in taxes" side of the Laffer Curve.

It’s not even honest on the tax trade offs. Total tax take is not a constraint on public provision in a floating exchange rate economy.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#69

Post by econ »

ghurtado wrote: post #17
smallmancontrov wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, it's not one lie, it's a pack of lies, trotted out every time congress needs to justify another capital gains tax cut or rationalize why the next tax hike needs to target work not wealth.

It's much more than a set of lies, it's an entire cultural phenomenon 100% USA made. Unlike many of our worst ideas, I'm actually surprised this one didn't become more popular around the world.

That's quite funny. I recall several people not even responding but just silently staring at the proponent. Other bad ideas (like privatization) were adopted by repeating opposing talking points.

Re: Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich (2023)

#70

Post by bena »

manlymuppet wrote: post #56
odo1242 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, one is a name of a policy used by supporters, and the other is another name of the same policy used by critics? Name an actual difference?

One is a policy. The other is not a policy. I can name you differences, but it's like comparing apples and oranges.

Name one that is not "one's a policy and the other is not".
Post reply on HN