The theory is associated with Ronald Reagan (Reaganomics) and the Democratically controlled congress during his presidency, which followed his lead and cut the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 28%. The idea is that given more money the rich will invest in business infrastructure and equities, and that will somehow filter down to the middle class and poor because employment will increase. There is absolutely no proof that any such thing occurs. In fact, evidence is accumulating that demonstrates the opposite, and no economist has ever proposed a "trickle-down" theory of economics. Instead, macroeconomics adheres to a "supply-side" theory. I don't need to point out that instead business infrastructure has been transferred to the third world and unemployment in the USA has exploded with the more recent Bush tax cuts.
I would go so far in my radical political stance to propose that any trickle-down economic proponent is a Twenty-first Century Marie Antoinette. Instead of the infamously incorrect quote, “Let them eat cake,” they might as well be saying “let them eat our table scraps!” Thus, I have created the graphic above.
2 comments:
Here is a quote from the book "The Laws Of Life" that relates to what you are saying: "The life of a country spans many decades, and karma doesn't necessarily come back tomorrow morning; it sometimes takes several years. In the meantime, everybody thinks they are getting a free ride. But they are forgetting the basic Law Of Economy, which is the Law of Cause and Effect. You pay for everything you get, both spiritually and materially."
Unfortunately, that statement, while quite eloquent may be taken in at least two directions. :(
Post a Comment