Look, we tried trickle-down economics for over forty years. It simply didn’t work. The national debt exploded and nothing trickled-down, so now we move on.

Stimulating the economy from the bottom up is clearly more effective. A rising tide should lift all boats, not just yachts.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tax-cuts-rich-50-years-no-trickle-down/

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

Tax cuts for the wealthy didn't boost the economies of the U.S. and 17 other countries — but they did worsen income inequality.

@danwentzel

💯 I'd love to see a study of the tax revenues from one million dollar yacht purchase, vs 1000 ppl spending $1000.

Gov's make money not on tax rates, but on number of transactions. Lots of small transactions from money circulating would seem to generate more tax revenue...allowing actual lower tax rates.

vs having 15 people have half the money in. the. world. locked up and not circulating beyond yacht purchases.

@pixelpusher220 @danwentzel Plus, if the little people spend $1000 on rent, groceries, household goods, maybe some entertainment, where does that money go? Into the pockets of the rich, who can then do the same things with that money as if they'd been given it directly.

@jack_of_sandwich @danwentzel

Did you purposely miss the point? B/c it sorta seems like it

@pixelpusher220 @danwentzel I'm less interested int the government's revenue than the effects on the economy.
And injecting money at the bottom is going to do more than just injecting it at the top, because it will go through all the layers from the bottom and still end up with any benefit giving it to the rich would have had.

@jack_of_sandwich @danwentzel my post is quite literally about the tax revenues...so I'll take that as a yes.

Good day

@pixelpusher220 @danwentzel I guess you purposely missed Dan's point, then.