What’s outrageous is that this is being treated as news, when it’s not new, e.g. (from 2021) https://www.thebalancemoney.com/trickle-down-economics-theory-effect-does-it-work-3305572
We’ve known this that since at least 2001, if not earlier, https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2001/09/the-trickle-down-economics-straw-man/
My understanding this was known in the economics circles in 1980s too but people were able to make careers shilling the lie since owner class favor them.
Good grief, that means this lie has been successfully peddled for nearly half a century.
We need to stop shaming people for believing in religion and start shaming them for believing in trickle down.
It_s_the_same_picture.jpg
We have proof that Jesus Christ at least existed and was put to death by a Roman Leader named Pontious Pilate, we have no proof he was actually divine.
This means there is more proof for Christianity than “Give the ravenous gluttons who want for nought more pie and somehow the starving children will be fed.”
I mean it’s basically the same thing at this point.
We know, we know.
People should be always taxed more depending on how much more they make starting at 500,000$ a year for a single person imo. Once you hit that threshold you’re far above a normal human…far above.
If wages/salary are your primary/only source of income, you are not part of the wealthy class, even if it is $500k. Not even close.
Yeah, the problem being that they get compensated in shares, etc, above that point, meaning they dodge all the income tax anyway.
Economists have written the same article for years.
This is like that Onion school shooting article that just changes the location except they count how many years it’s been since Reagan
Well, not the same article. They have to find/replace the name every couple years. Horse and sparrow, supply side, trickle down, …
I like horse and sparrow. It openly admits it’s horseshit.
In the same way that a Ponzi scheme failed to pay its bagholders. It’s by design.
They spent those 50 years convincing half the voting population that evidence doesn’t matter, unfortunately.
Good old degradation of public school standards.
Combined with 24 hour propaganda on “news” nwtworks
Public school funding can’t be used to fuel the military industrial complex.
Not without a little imagination.
This one’s going places!
One year of printing new dollars and forcibly closing small businesses has failed to make things cheaper, new study shows.
It’s by design. But in a serious country, serious world, or amongst serious people, we would’ve been laughing at the “Laffer curve” the moment Laffer ejaculated it into the napkin he first wet dreamed it upon.
But instead because we’re both as laughable as the curve itself and because the rich, industrial asshats in this country were foaming at the mouth for a thin, arguably objective, seemingly mathematical piece of horseshit to cover their “steal from the poor and give to the rich” policy preferences, reproductions of Arthur’s ejaculate was disseminated like it was the fucking Mona Lisa.
It should never be said that conservatives are conservative in the normal, adjective sense of the word. For the last fifty years, they’ve been tearing at the fraying seams of society and have been using “trickle down economics” as their seam ripper, while simultaneously blaming anything and everything other than their objectively horrific policies for the havoc wreaked.
Oh, the laffer curve is just fine. The issue is, the people who choose to missuse it deliberately or through utter ignorance never mention that the X value is about 90%. As I always say to those types whenever they bring it up:
“Theh all want to talk about the laffer curve, right up until you have to explain to them how hight the X value is. Then, as if by magic, they suddenly don’t want to talk about it anymore and never agreed with it in the first place.”
The real problem with economics, imo, is that they always presume inequality to not exist, in order to make the calculations work. The reason being that, if you accept that inequality exists and add it to the pot, as it were, the answer always comes out as “the problem is inequality.”
However, that doesn’t justify tax breaks for the rich or their rampant greed and exploitation. So, we pretend its non-existent and, tbf, in a wold with no inequality what so ever, where only the best rise to the top and anyone could be rich, if they worked for it and it wasn’t a closed shop, most of neoliberalism would be absolute genius.
Of course, the problem is that, in the real world, inequality not only exists but is the definining feature of our economy.
Indeed, Ronnie was and still is a big POS in my book. The USA should bring the tax brackets from the 1960’s back.
How about we try some trickle up economics for a while? That’s where you give money to people who actually need it, and let businesses compete for them as customers, and the revenue will trickle up to successful companies.
Might as well, right?
We did. Brought to you by Roosevelt.
(Offer not available to black people)
The biggest criticism is hilarious. They say poor people don’t use the money responsibly. It just passes right through their hands. They neglect to mention that’s because they’re buying needed goods and services and that money trickles up far more reliably than money trickles down.
It just passes right through their hands
Plus a general illiteracy for economics where that should be the goal because the economy grows with money spent, not money saved
My personal theory is they’re also trying to normalize the money not moving into the economy.
It’s almost like you can have a monetary system and trade without all the crony klepto bullshit of the current system.
This will never stop being funny
At least he’s getting his.
As long as he said sorry to God before he died and meant it, in Christianity, he’s in heaven.
Same goes for Hitler, if he meant it.
If you have a problem with that, no matter how perfect a person you might be, you’ll be in hell instead because, ultimately, it doesn’t matter how bad of a person you are or what sins you’ve committed.
Only one thing matters.
If heaven exists, it’ll be full of people like Reagan. You’ll be spending eternity with right wing Christian Conservatives and much, much worse.
Meanwhile hell will have all the drinkers, the stoners, the ravers, revelers and rascals; it’ll have all the gay people, the hippies and every alternative culture you can think of. Hell will have all the promiscuous people, the people who just love sex and the professionals too. We’ll have all the people who know how to make drugs, the fun ones, and we’ll have none of those judgmental life-haters around, either as they’ll all be in heaven.
Were gonna have a wicked time. Reagan won’t be welcome, no matter who’s arsehole he’s got his tongue up.
Sorry, I just ran with it. Its not really at you.
Heaven for the climate, hell for the company
Total absolution isn’t actually a thing in most forms of Christianity except via baptism.
And baptism can’t be done twice. It’s a one time thing, after that you’re expected to actually live as if you believe. Charity and not sinning and shit.
Basically you have to try to live like Fred Rogers.
Jesus was very clear about that in the one time he talked about eternal punishment.
It was the part welcoming immigrants, feeding the poor, and visiting the prisoners.
Also the part about not being a hypocrite praying loudly in the street, but being devote and praying in the quiet of your home.
But that’s regular Jesus. Not Supply Side Jesus.
Supply Side Jesus can be bribed, so list your local church in your will for instant absolution.
You’ll have to let me know what part of the bible says that because its not in any parts that I read.
While baptism itself is in the bible, baptism absolving sin is something made up centuries later, so that churches could have some of that old school shaman ritual stuff they didnt have any of.
More so, the only opposing view to the one above would be the Catholic one and their interpretation is problematic at best.
People really need to check the fine-print on that particular covenant.
The passage is in Mathew 25. Often called the Sheep and the Goats.
And yeah, it’s all made up with bits and pieces added later by different people, but that passage in Mathew 25 is pretty clear that you have to feed the poor, welcome the immigrant, (or the stranger as found in some translations), visit the prisoner, clothe those who need it, etc.
And the punishment for not doing these things is everlasting punishment in the fires of hell.
Fun fact, there’s a Cake song about this passage. Sort of.
1 John 1:9 ,
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
Therefore, they will be righteous and included with the sheep and never asked goat (people on the right hand side) questions.
Like I said, its all about the fine print. Righteousness isn’t the ticket.
Ah yes, but confession has to be sincere.
But Supply Side Jesus thinks that money equals sincerity. And that Mathew guy sounds woke.
Fun fact, to my understanding, Mathew 25 is the only place in the Bible that talks about eternal punishment.
There might also be something in Revelations, but that’s all revenge fantasy about Nero.
Oh no … it did work … it worked spectacularly … for the top wealthiest people in the world
They figured out that they could cut the amount of taxes they had to pay, collect even more wealth for themselves and convince everyone around them and all the poor people out there like you and me that it was all perfectly acceptable, and sensible and that we should all keep electing government officials to keep that system going while we all paid for it. The wealthiest figured out how they could keep their money and make us all pay for it. And they did it for 50 years. And they’re still doing it.
I think it worked fantastic … for them.
We just need to be more patient and tax-cut the wealthy even harder. Then it’ll properly start to trickle. Just a little longer
I think I can feel it. It’s warm. And… smells a bit like asparagus?
I agree … but the problem is … it took 50 years for us to get to this point and it will probably take 50 years or longer to get it back to a manageable level again. That is, if we take 50 years of consistently pushing back against the wealthy in the same way that the wealthy have been pressing the poor for the past 50 years.
Lina Khan (in the US) is taking those first steps. Harris better keep her in place.
