U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-27-2020, 10:48 AM
 
8,817 posts, read 3,268,922 times
Reputation: 11458

Advertisements

This paper from the London School of Economics reaffirms what most of knew all along: "Trickle down" tax cuts don't work. They don't benefit the economy as a whole, they don't benefit the lower income classes. They only help the rich get richer and increase income inequality.

The authors used statistical and analytical methods to determine the effects of tax cuts for the wealthy from 1965 to 2015 in 18 countries.

"Our findings on the effects of growth and unemployment provide evidence against supply-side theories that suggest lower taxes on the rich will induce labour supply responses from high-income individuals ... that boost economic activity...Overall, our analysis finds strong evidence that cutting taxes on the rich increases income inequality but has no effect on growth or unemployment."

This paper should be the final nail in Trickle Down's coffin. I suspect supply-siders know their theory is endangered because they are too embarrassed to call it "trickle down" anymore. Can we all finally admit and agree that supply side doesn't work and move on?

The Economic Consequences of Major Tax Cuts for the Rich
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-27-2020, 11:26 AM
 
11,001 posts, read 11,077,129 times
Reputation: 10024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
This paper from the London School of Economics reaffirms what most of knew all along: "Trickle down" tax cuts don't work. They don't benefit the economy as a whole, they don't benefit the lower income classes. They only help the rich get richer and increase income inequality.

The authors used statistical and analytical methods to determine the effects of tax cuts for the wealthy from 1965 to 2015 in 18 countries.

"Our findings on the effects of growth and unemployment provide evidence against supply-side theories that suggest lower taxes on the rich will induce labour supply responses from high-income individuals ... that boost economic activity...Overall, our analysis finds strong evidence that cutting taxes on the rich increases income inequality but has no effect on growth or unemployment."

This paper should be the final nail in Trickle Down's coffin. I suspect supply-siders know their theory is endangered because they are too embarrassed to call it "trickle down" anymore. Can we all finally admit and agree that supply side doesn't work and move on?

The Economic Consequences of Major Tax Cuts for the Rich
You realize outside of the few communists in economics LSE's III houses among the most leftwing economists on the planet? No conclusion outside, "soak the rich" is possible from that crowd.

You can twist and hate all you want the fact remains supply side ideas pulled England from its socialistic morrase of '60s and '70s.

Probably the greatest left leaning economist of all time, Paul Samuelson, was a champion of supply side ideas........read JFK's tax cuts.

__________________

If high taxes and endless social programs actually worked France, Italy, Spain etc. would be economic models for the world it simply ain't so.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 12:23 PM
 
8,817 posts, read 3,268,922 times
Reputation: 11458
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
You can twist and hate all you want the fact remains supply side ideas pulled England from its socialistic morrase of '60s and '70s.
There is no bias in this study. It's pure math and the authors disclosed their methods. The numbers don't lie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
Probably the greatest left leaning economist of all time, Paul Samuelson, was a champion of supply side ideas........read JFK's tax cuts.
JFK dropped the top tax rate from 91 percent to 65 percent. Okay, let's raise our top rate back to 65% since you consider that to be "supply side." But of course you'll object. In Supply Side World, tax rates are a one way street, always to be cut downward.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
If high taxes and endless social programs actually worked France, Italy, Spain etc. would be economic models for the world it simply ain't so.
Those high tax social welfare nations have a much better standard of living than the U.S.
Our standard of living isn't in the top 10, and we are slowly dropping. But we keep telling ourselves that we are the best in the world at everything. That may have been true in 1968 but it's not true now.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ing-by-country
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 12:45 PM
 
11,001 posts, read 11,077,129 times
Reputation: 10024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
There is no bias in this study. It's pure math and the authors disclosed their methods. The numbers don't lie.



JFK dropped the top tax rate from 91 percent to 65 percent. Okay, let's raise our top rate back to 65% since you consider that to be "supply side." But of course you'll object. In Supply Side World, tax rates are a one way street, always to be cut downward.



Those high tax social welfare nations have a much better standard of living than the U.S.
Our standard of living isn't in the top 10, and we are slowly dropping. But we keep telling ourselves that we are the best in the world at everything. That may have been true in 1968 but it's not true now.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ing-by-country
I'll be back later but your responses are low information, reflexive nonsense on all counts.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 01:58 PM
 
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
8,089 posts, read 3,494,508 times
Reputation: 5675
We did give our renters an abatement, which was $1200 for 2020. They recently left and we have new renters but at $300/yr less than Jan 2020, and is less than 2016. The other rental we also have new tenants but also have left the rents the same since 2017 acquisition. Seattle. Overall, our income from rentals is falling behind when compared to our variable annuities and stock market investments.
Our stock market investments are doing well, overall ~18%+, YTD.
Increased donations.
We are ahead YTD.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 06:59 PM
 
10,818 posts, read 8,852,861 times
Reputation: 9657
The economies became less industrialized and more financialized. UK and London is a model for what the US did. The increased leverage inflates asset prices and income derived from wealth, which is concentrated in the top 10 percent. Cutting top-tier tax rates or creating special tax breaks reduces the benefit to the rest of society of the gains that are being bestowed by government as central banking is essentially its right arm. The US is doing more of the latter, creating ridiculously low special tax rates of 0 or 15 percent for certain activities by wealthy individuals. That keeps the top marginal tax rates high which prevents actions to reverse the favoritism in the tax system.

Debt-to-GDP tells the tale of why the economy grew faster after 1980. It broke out of its long-term trading range. The irony is that one of the issues for which the Carter administration was taken to task was the large federal budget deficit.

Last edited by lchoro; 12-27-2020 at 07:20 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 07:09 PM
 
Location: USA
1,433 posts, read 473,040 times
Reputation: 3859
Figures don't lie but liars figure.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 08:39 PM
 
10,189 posts, read 8,516,502 times
Reputation: 5234
Quote:
Originally Posted by leastprime View Post
We did give our renters an abatement, which was $1200 for 2020. They recently left and we have new renters but at $300/yr less than Jan 2020, and is less than 2016. The other rental we also have new tenants but also have left the rents the same since 2017 acquisition. Seattle. Overall, our income from rentals is falling behind when compared to our variable annuities and stock market investments.
Our stock market investments are doing well, overall ~18%+, YTD.
Increased donations.
We are ahead YTD.
FED, Govt, banks have been propping up the financial markets. Ultimately, the worth of your stocks and annuities is tied to how much cash they bring you eventually. Cash is how people get the little things that make people happy. But if these markets are artificially kept afloat, then the return is losing value.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...s-help-or-not/
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2020, 08:50 PM
 
6,259 posts, read 1,933,434 times
Reputation: 7409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
This paper from the London School of Economics reaffirms what most of knew all along: "Trickle down" tax cuts don't work. They don't benefit the economy as a whole, they don't benefit the lower income classes. They only help the rich get richer and increase income inequality.

The authors used statistical and analytical methods to determine the effects of tax cuts for the wealthy from 1965 to 2015 in 18 countries.

"Our findings on the effects of growth and unemployment provide evidence against supply-side theories that suggest lower taxes on the rich will induce labour supply responses from high-income individuals ... that boost economic activity...Overall, our analysis finds strong evidence that cutting taxes on the rich increases income inequality but has no effect on growth or unemployment."

This paper should be the final nail in Trickle Down's coffin. I suspect supply-siders know their theory is endangered because they are too embarrassed to call it "trickle down" anymore. Can we all finally admit and agree that supply side doesn't work and move on?

The Economic Consequences of Major Tax Cuts for the Rich
You have demand ready to be unleashed if only the consumers had the buying power. There is no other way this will work, it's not "build it and they will come" - not without money in their pockets to spend, anyway.

Trickle up is a guarantee because we all have needs and wants, and will fulfill them given the resources. That's human behavior. It is no indication, however, that any benefits at the upper end will be shared.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-28-2020, 01:20 AM
 
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
8,089 posts, read 3,494,508 times
Reputation: 5675
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
FED, Govt, banks have been propping up the financial markets. Ultimately, the worth of your stocks and annuities is tied to how much cash they bring you eventually. Cash is how people get the little things that make people happy. But if these markets are artificially kept afloat, then the return is losing value.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...s-help-or-not/
Yes, I know what is happening. IF one has any wealth, you got to go to what is making money.
Money will flow into what will give better future returns.
And the alternatives with this current leadership and Congress?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top