It’s almost like every word a conservative (and neoliberal) says is deception or manipulation.
This cannot be solved peacefully.
Because the plan all along is generational theft.
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, …
XKCD: Todays 10000 is just as relevant for this topic as it is for mentos and diet pop.
we should not stop bringing this up until it isnt relevant anymore. Which isnt going to be in my life time, likely, so you people everywhere who are either just reaching a point in your life where this IS news to you, or you have people in your circles that havent got the message yet, this seems like a good report to reference.
It’s not enough to know or believe a thing.
It’s being able to get that info the heads of people who don’t know or haven’t accepted it yet, by hook or crook, that we must be diligent for and this article, helps us do that.
Don’t be only be bitter and cynical, if you are, also be part of the needed majority of people who will champion the bed to take down this flawed policy. Even if you only carry the torch to pass on to those that come after us.
It’s s fight with fighting. Spread the knowledge don’t make people feel bad for not already knowing this or believing it. Maybe this is the straw that breaks the supply side camels back
Shocked. I am shocked to the core.
I am Jacks complete and utter disbelief. I lead him to depression, and he dies of malnutrition and liver failure.
That just sounds like regular corruption ?
with extra steps
How about now?
Is this going to be like UBI studies, where the news pretends every one of hundreds of studies is the one that is breaking this news for the first time? My economics professor was taking the piss out of supply side economics over a decade ago.
Endorsement of trickle-down is usually made for the same reason as criticisms of UBI… Conservative voters are ignorant of the concept of elasticity in economics, and their politicians know it.
Some people are either unaware or like being trickled upon. Somehow there still seems to be widespread support for tax cuts to the wealthy. Somehow people seem to remember “tax cut” while either being unaware or not remembering whose taxes were cut. Somehow they already forgot when Warren Buffet made a big deal of his tax rate being lower than his secretary’s and that we should fix that. As recently as this summer I found someone surprised that the Trump tax “cuts” increased my taxes
“Trickle-Upon Economics” really does capture the vibe and the reality of the experience.
The goldfish memory of news organizations doesn’t help. If they reported this accurately it would be, “Another Study Confirms Trickle Down Doesn’t Work”
No. It doesn’t seem to me that the article pretends this one study is breaking any news for the first time. It cites other studies and individuals that have expressed the same idea for a long time. Possibly this is the first rigorous study of the 50 years from 1965 to 2015, I dunno.
This is what’s before the fold. Combined with the headline, most people are not going to come away with the sense that this is a long known thing.
Tax cuts for the wealthy have long drawn support from conservative lawmakers and economists who argue that such measures will “trickle down” and eventually boost jobs and incomes for everyone else. But a new study from the London School of Economics says 50 years of such tax cuts have only helped one group — the rich.
The new paper, by David Hope of the London School of Economics and Julian Limberg of King’s College London, examines 18 developed countries — from Australia to the United States — over a 50-year period from 1965 to 2015. The study compared countries that passed tax cuts in a specific year, such as the U.S. in 1982 when President Ronald Reagan slashed taxes on the wealthy, with those that didn’t, and then examined their economic outcomes.
When it does get into it below the fold it talks about the pandemic. When it could talk about how we’ve known this for literal decades. (I love the second one. It’s six years after Reagan is elected and written by a pro-trickle down economist whose having to move the goal posts to keep defending it.)
Yeah, no shit. Something anyone remotely educated on the topic has known since the policies went into place. The problem isn’t that the information wasn’t there, it’s that no one with enough power to benefit from it is willing to do anything about it.
What do you mean, corporations that have a legal obligation to maximize value for shareholders weren’t passing money on to consumers out of the goodness of their hearts? Nobody could have seen that coming! /S
This, and other thought provoking commentary in this month’s upcoming edition of “DUH!!!”.
I will never get why it is the most well off of us that they give the tax cuts too. I mean, other than bribery of course. Even if it did work, how long were they supposed to wait? “I know little Timmy needs braces, and you can’t afford to feed them them, but just wait a little longer! Musk is almost done with dicking around with the election. I’m sure it’ll trickle down then!”
😲
Quells surprise
