ADVERTISEMENT

50 Year Study Reveals Trickle Down Economics Doesn't Work

Anecdotally that may be true, but not systemically (which is what affects most people).




A flat tax, although it sounds good and is easy to market, is unfortunately, regressive because poorer and middle class folks end up having to spend more of their wages in order to pay their taxes, whereas millionaires and billionaires don't. This makes it regressive. A progressive tax would therefore be better - where the very extreme minority of folks pay a much higher percentage and the middle class pay less than what they pay today.
If a millionaire pays let's say 10% of his income then he would be paying 100,000. If someone making 40,000 per year pays 10% they would be paying 4,000 dollars. Seems about as fair as it could get. They are both paying their fair share if they're paying the same percentage. BTW, why does anything that happens that you can see with your own eyes become an anecdote?
 
  • Like
Reactions: krvanness
The best thing about globalization is why Raouls ideal situation will never happen. 80 years ago there were maybe 10 world class cities and people had to be there to enjoy many of societies best entertainment, social functions, and benefits.

Now there are 100s and 1,000s of these cities across the world. You see it with California businesses fleeing to Texas and NYC businesses flocking to FL. The relative similarity in these world-class cities creates the exact competition that true capitalism thrives in.

If a city, state, or country wants to continue succeeding at creating demand it has to compete with other governments to draw those people and businesses.

As usual, competition and free markets provide the best services and opportunities for people while driving down costs. Which is why Texas and FL are thriving while CA and NY are losing their tax base and mired in deficits.

No city or state (and soon country) will ever be able to implement these wealth distributions and ridiculous taxes because people are more mobile than ever and new generations are not tied to a specific “home”. They will implement these taxes and everyone rich will leave to a place that is competing for their tax dollars to be spent in the way that is best and most advantageous for them.

You’ve already got poorer nations opening their arms and making it incredibly easy to move there as long as you have guaranteed income and can contribute positively to their economy.

 
Last edited:
The best thing about globalization is why Raouls ideal situation will never happen. 80 years ago there were maybe 10 world class cities and people had to be there to enjoy many of societies best entertainment, social functions, and benefits.

Now there are 100s and 1,000s of these cities across the world. You see it with California businesses fleeing to Texas and NYC businesses flocking to FL. The relative similarity in these world-class cities creates the exact competition that true capitalism thrives in.

If a city, state, or country wants to continue succeeding at creating demand it has to compete with other governments to draw those people and businesses.

As usual, competition and free markets provide the best services and opportunities for people while driving down costs. Which is why Texas and FL are thriving while CA and NY are losing their tax base and mired in deficits.
Utah is also thriving thanks to conservative leadership. Not easy to do when 66% of the land here is owned by the Federal Government and the environmental whackos continue to try to lock up even more.
 
If a millionaire pays let's say 10% of his income then he would be paying 100,000. If someone making 40,000 per year pays 10% they would be paying 4,000 dollars. Seems about as fair as it could get. They are both paying their fair share if they're paying the same percentage. BTW, why does anything that happens that you can see with your own eyes become an anecdote?


They are actually not paying their fair share because a more significant portion of the total funds available to someone in the poor or middle classes would be going to tax expenditure, while the wealthy individual would still pay the same percentage, they would have more than enough income to offset the tax load. That makes it disproportionately favor the wealthier person.

As to your 2nd point about anecdotes - its just not a very useful way to debate a macro level topic like taxes. Anyone can pluck an observation of someone they know who did well and try to pretend that a majority of people are successful because one person you know is - but that's just not born out by the data. Its similar to the guy on here who swore that Trump would win PA during the election because he only knew people who supported Trump. But that's not what the polling data suggested at the time, and indeed, the data ended up picking the eventual winner. That's why data is a much more comprehensive way of looking at an issue instead of random anecdotes.
 
They are actually not paying their fair share because a more significant portion of the total funds available to someone in the poor or middle classes would be going to tax expenditure, while the wealthy individual would still pay the same percentage, they would have more than enough income to offset the tax load. That makes it disproportionately favor the wealthier person.

As to your 2nd point about anecdotes - its just not a very useful way to debate a macro level topic like taxes. Anyone can pluck an observation of someone they know who did well and try to pretend that a majority of people are successful because one person you know is - but that's just not born out by the data. Its similar to the guy on here who swore that Trump would win PA during the election because he only knew people who supported Trump. But that's not what the polling data suggested at the time, and indeed, the data ended up picking the eventual winner. That's why data is a much more comprehensive way of looking at an issue instead of random anecdotes.
They are paying exactly the same percentage of their incomes. God sure thought it was fair when it came to tithing. Once again, I will trust what I've seen with my eyes for 58 years over a study in a lab. Numbers and studies can get a bit twisted towards a favorable pattern.
 
The best thing about globalization is why Raouls ideal situation will never happen. 80 years ago there were maybe 10 world class cities and people had to be there to enjoy many of societies best entertainment, social functions, and benefits.

Now there are 100s and 1,000s of these cities across the world. You see it with California businesses fleeing to Texas and NYC businesses flocking to FL. The relative similarity in these world-class cities creates the exact competition that true capitalism thrives in.

If a city, state, or country wants to continue succeeding at creating demand it has to compete with other governments to draw those people and businesses.

As usual, competition and free markets provide the best services and opportunities for people while driving down costs. Which is why Texas and FL are thriving while CA and NY are losing their tax base and mired in deficits.

No city or state (and soon country) will ever be able to implement these wealth distributions and ridiculous taxes because people are more mobile than ever and new generations are not tied to a specific “home”. They will implement these taxes and everyone rich will leave to a place that is competing for their tax dollars to be spent in the way that is best and most advantageous for them.

You’ve already got poorer nations opening their arms and making it incredibly easy to move there as long as you have guaranteed income and can contribute positively to their economy.


Unregulated markets always work to the detriment of the general public because they are by their very nature predatory in order to make as much money as possible. Tighter regulations are the only way to ensure corporations don't take advantage of workers and consumers; since if left unchecked, they would do everything from raise prescription prices by thousands of percent, pollute the air and water, claim nicotine wasn't addictive, and endless other negative outcomes.
 
Last edited:
They are paying exactly the same percentage of their incomes. God sure thought it was fair when it came to tithing. Once again, I will trust what I've seen with my eyes for 58 years over a study in a lab. Numbers and studies can get a bit twisted towards a favorable pattern.

The percentage of their incomes is irrelevant if paying the same flat tax is a greater portion of the income of the poor and middle class guy. This obviously favors the wealthy, which is why flat tax proposals never gain any significant momentum - they are regressive when we should be looking at a progressive tax system.
 
The percentage of their incomes is irrelevant if paying the same flat tax is a greater portion of the income of the poor and middle class guy. This obviously favors the wealthy, which is why flat tax proposals never gain any significant momentum - they are regressive when we should be looking at a progressive tax system.
My wife and I had nothing when we met. Neither of us have inherited as much as a dime from our Dads that died and both our Mom's are in a home with no money. I was a roofer and she was a clerk that worked her way up over 25 years to running a mortgage company with no college education. We both worked hard and saved and sacrificed to our children over the years to put money away and still live within our means. My wife has invested wisely and we are now in a somewhat comfortable position. There is a reason why some accumulate wealth and others don't. Maybe it should be a lesson to children to see the difference between parents that blow what money they make by bad decisions and those that decide to save even just a little towards their family's future. You would do nothing more than penalize success by taxing them more. It's no different than the Dem cities that are looking for bailouts right now simply because of their poor policy decisions that they make that lead them to such huge budget deficits. Why should the good people of Utah, that spend their budgets wisely, be expected to pay for the mistaken policies of places like San Fran, Chicago, Detroit and so on? There are and should be consequences to bad decisions.
 
Unregulated markets always work to the detriment of the general public because they are by their very nature predatory in order to make as much money as possible. Tighter regulations are the only way to ensure corporations don't take advantage of workers and consumers; since if left unchecked, they would do everything from raise prescription prices by thousands of percent, pollute the air and water, claim nicotine wasn't addictive, and endless other negative outcomes.

If you truly believe this, you are an idiot. Regulation does everything you are referring to. Read a companies earnings report and you will find how they welcome regulations as it cuts out competition and allows them to monopolize pricing while not having to fend off competitors.

Funny you used prescription companies as an example. One of the most regulated businesses out there, along with healthcare in general. Ever wonder why the price and quality of lasik and enhancement services (Botox, boobs, etc) has gotten so cheap and such higher quality over the past 10 years. Ding, ding, competition which is non-existent in other areas of healthcare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: utatem
When presented with factual evidence, just claim its fake so you don't have to deal with said evidence. Brilliant!
You know what doesn't work 100%? Taking from the Government as a handout and trying to do wealth redistribution. Don't need a WAPO graph for that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 801canesmxer
My wife and I had nothing when we met. Neither of us have inherited as much as a dime from our Dads that died and both our Mom's are in a home with no money. I was a roofer and she was a clerk that worked her way up over 25 years to running a mortgage company with no college education. We both worked hard and saved and sacrificed to our children over the years to put money away and still live within our means. My wife has invested wisely and we are now in a somewhat comfortable position. There is a reason why some accumulate wealth and others don't. Maybe it should be a lesson to children to see the difference between parents that blow what money they make by bad decisions and those that decide to save even just a little towards their family's future. You would do nothing more than penalize success by taxing them more. It's no different than the Dem cities that are looking for bailouts right now simply because of their poor policy decisions that they make that lead them to such huge budget deficits. Why should the good people of Utah, that spend their budgets wisely, be expected to pay for the mistaken policies of places like San Fran, Chicago, Detroit and so on? There are and should be consequences to bad decisions.
EXACTLY! My dad died when I was 16. He left mom with 4 kids I was the eldest. She never worked a day in her life as was common in the 1960's. I joined Navy at 17 and when I got out in 85 I had maybe a few hundred bucks in my pocket. Met my wife and we worked AND SAVED and INVESTED and LIVED WITHIN OUR MEANS. Raised 3 sons to do the same. Now I will turn 59 and I still follow the same rules that got me where I am today. I tell young people all the time; When you get paid put the first 10-15% away and save it then use the rest for your bills and enjoyment and watch how fast it builds up. Once it builds up you hate to see it go down. Many on here would benefit from reading the book The Millionaire Next Door which details how these people live who have a net worth of 1 million and up. They would be surprised.
 
Capitalism already works for all that are willing to work for it. An equitable system would be one that gives all citizens an opportunity to succeed, which America already does. America has turned more poor people into millionaires than any other country.
Capitalism isn't about becoming a millionaire it's about an honest opportunity to better one's life and provide for themselves and their family. In many Countries that is just a dream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 801canesmxer
You know what doesn't work 100%? Taking from the Government as a handout and trying to do wealth redistribution. Don't need a WAPO graph for that one.

A 90% tax on billionaires should do the trick, and would fund a vast majority of our needs in terms of infrastructure, healthcare, education etc.
 
EXACTLY! My dad died when I was 16. He left mom with 4 kids I was the eldest. She never worked a day in her life as was common in the 1960's. I joined Navy at 17 and when I got out in 85 I had maybe a few hundred bucks in my pocket. Met my wife and we worked AND SAVED and INVESTED and LIVED WITHIN OUR MEANS. Raised 3 sons to do the same. Now I will turn 59 and I still follow the same rules that got me where I am today. I tell young people all the time; When you get paid put the first 10-15% away and save it then use the rest for your bills and enjoyment and watch how fast it builds up. Once it builds up you hate to see it go down. Many on here would benefit from reading the book The Millionaire Next Door which details how these people live who have a net worth of 1 million and up. They would be surprised.

You can't apply your anecdotal experiences of 40 years ago to people today. The country has changed and access to opportunity is greatly diminished to today's 19 year olds compared with what people of your generation went through. The high cost of buying a home for young people, soaring tuition debt, and a broken healthcare system make it exponentially more difficult to achieve the same level of progress today than 4 decades ago, so each time some boomer harken back to the romantic notion of hard work, paying their way through college by taking dish washing jobs along the way, and saving their pennies in their piggy banks - that is an outdated concept today because the high cost of living today compared with the 70s and before, make it a lot more difficult.
 
You can't apply your anecdotal experiences of 40 years ago to people today. The country has changed and access to opportunity is greatly diminished to today's 19 year olds compared with what people of your generation went through. The high cost of buying a home for young people, soaring tuition debt, and a broken healthcare system make it exponentially more difficult to achieve the same level of progress today than 4 decades ago, so each time some boomer harken back to the romantic notion of hard work, paying their way through college by taking dish washing jobs along the way, and saving their pennies in their piggy banks - that is an outdated concept today because the high cost of living today compared with the 70s and before, make it a lot more difficult.
That's weird Raoul that is exactly what we told our parents.................40 years ago. Don't know about you but I have 3 sons 32, 31, and 28. They are humping and saving.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 801canesmxer
That's weird Raoul that is exactly what we told our parents.................40 years ago. Don't know about you but I have 3 sons 32, 31, and 28. They are humping and saving.

Nothing wrong with humping and saving, especially humping.
 
Capitalism isn't about becoming a millionaire it's about an honest opportunity to better one's life and provide for themselves and their family. In many Countries that is just a dream.

There's no such thing as pure capitalism or pure socialism since nearly every government in the world is a combination of the two. Otherwise we wouldn't have social security, medicare, medicaid, SNAP and a variety of other programs that would get politicians publicly lynched by citizens if they tried to cancel them. These are all basic social safety net initiatives and healthcare will be the next one that is added to that list here.
 
You can't apply your anecdotal experiences of 40 years ago to people today. The country has changed and access to opportunity is greatly diminished to today's 19 year olds compared with what people of your generation went through. The high cost of buying a home for young people, soaring tuition debt, and a broken healthcare system make it exponentially more difficult to achieve the same level of progress today than 4 decades ago, so each time some boomer harken back to the romantic notion of hard work, paying their way through college by taking dish washing jobs along the way, and saving their pennies in their piggy banks - that is an outdated concept today because the high cost of living today compared with the 70s and before, make it a lot more difficult.
Why is everything that happens right before our eyes labeled as anecdotal? Would you like a more recent example? Our niece had to live with us on two separate occasions. Her mom was a crack addict and was in jail a few times. We had her for 8 months when she was 6 and we still lived in Fl and for nearly two years after we moved to Utah when she was 12 to 14. She ended up moving in with her Father's other baby momma's house when she went back to Fl. By then her Mom was deported back to Canada and is still not allowed back in the US. Our niece never knew her father but lived with her half-siblings until she was 19. She kind of went from job to job and began drinking and using drugs herself for a bit. She met a guy and they had a son but the guy went to prison shortly after. Now she was single with a kid and really struggling. 4 years later she had a daughter with another guy and started settling down a bit more. They are still together. At 33 years of age she started going to nursing school and eventually became an ER nurse. She currently is one of the travelling COVID nurses and was just featured on a local news station in Amarillo a couple of days ago. This amazing young woman had every right to become a failure but instead became yet another American success story, er anecdote, through nothing more than her determination to make her and her kid's lives better. I guess where some see insurmountable obstacles, others see a challenge to overcome.
 
Why is everything that happens right before our eyes labeled as anecdotal? Would you like a more recent example? Our niece had to live with us on two separate occasions. Her mom was a crack addict and was in jail a few times. We had her for 8 months when she was 6 and we still lived in Fl and for nearly two years after we moved to Utah when she was 12 to 14. She ended up moving in with her Father's other baby momma's house when she went back to Fl. By then her Mom was deported back to Canada and is still not allowed back in the US. Our niece never knew her father but lived with her half-siblings until she was 19. She kind of went from job to job and began drinking and using drugs herself for a bit. She met a guy and they had a son but the guy went to prison shortly after. Now she was single with a kid and really struggling. 4 years later she had a daughter with another guy and started settling down a bit more. They are still together. At 33 years of age she started going to nursing school and eventually became an ER nurse. She currently is one of the travelling COVID nurses and was just featured on a local news station in Amarillo a couple of days ago. This amazing young woman had every right to become a failure but instead became yet another American success story, er anecdote, through nothing more than her determination to make her and her kid's lives better. I guess where some see insurmountable obstacles, others see a challenge to overcome.

Because that's what anecdotal means - a personal experience not necessarily true or reliable, because its merely based on a personal account rather than facts or research. If you attempted to write a research paper on a topic and used your personal anecdotes as your method of proving your point, you would be laughed out of the building. The government keeps statistics on issues like income inequality in order to allow people who study this stuff for a living to do proper scientific research. Again - just because you happen to know a person or two who has overcome adversity, doesn't meant that millions of others aren't struggling to do the same because they are working with a system where cards are stacked against them from the beginning.
 
Because that's what anecdotal means - a personal experience not necessarily true or reliable, because its merely based on a personal account rather than facts or research. If you attempted to write a research paper on a topic and used your personal anecdotes as your method of proving your point, you would be laughed out of the building. The government keeps statistics on issues like income inequality in order to allow people who study this stuff for a living to do proper scientific research. Again - just because you happen to know a person or two who has overcome adversity, doesn't meant that millions of others aren't struggling to do the same because they are working with a system where cards are stacked against them from the beginning.
There are those that study for a living that tend to skew results to whatever view they have. There is also a saying that goes, There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. I'll still trust what I've seen with my own eyes over 58 years. Nobody said that success is easy, just that is is available for those that are willing to work for it. Our niece got her ER license just 2 years ago, BTW.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raoul2
Why is everything that happens right before our eyes labeled as anecdotal? Would you like a more recent example? Our niece had to live with us on two separate occasions. Her mom was a crack addict and was in jail a few times. We had her for 8 months when she was 6 and we still lived in Fl and for nearly two years after we moved to Utah when she was 12 to 14. She ended up moving in with her Father's other baby momma's house when she went back to Fl. By then her Mom was deported back to Canada and is still not allowed back in the US. Our niece never knew her father but lived with her half-siblings until she was 19. She kind of went from job to job and began drinking and using drugs herself for a bit. She met a guy and they had a son but the guy went to prison shortly after. Now she was single with a kid and really struggling. 4 years later she had a daughter with another guy and started settling down a bit more. They are still together. At 33 years of age she started going to nursing school and eventually became an ER nurse. She currently is one of the travelling COVID nurses and was just featured on a local news station in Amarillo a couple of days ago. This amazing young woman had every right to become a failure but instead became yet another American success story, er anecdote, through nothing more than her determination to make her and her kid's lives better. I guess where some see insurmountable obstacles, others see a challenge to overcome.
Good for her. Some have a MUCH harder path for sure. She may never become a millionaire but she is living the American Dream. You must be very proud of her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 801canesmxer
Good for her. Some have a MUCH harder path for sure. She may never become a millionaire but she is living the American Dream. You must be very proud of her.
Very proud HJ. They even made her the boss of the ER nurses in Amarillo for a day and now are trying to hire her there. Not sure she wants to leave her home in Ft Myers though and she enjoys doing the travelling nurse thing because of the need right now.
 
There's no socialism involved in anything related to this thread. In fact, there's nothing even remotely negative about capitalism in this debate. Its simply a matter of creating a more balanced playing field for everyone, not just the extreme minority of very wealthy. Tax cuts benefit them disproportionately to the point where it actually creates more inequality among the non-wealthy. That's the entire point of what the research reveals.

would you say the more money you make, the more opportunity you have and Vice versa?

That is a fair statement regardless of form of government. Just the facts
 
I would agree with that, with the caveat that if you come from a historically privileged background then you begin with more opportunity and if you don't then you begin with less. So irrespective of a person's standing if they happen to already be rich, the point is to get every one to begin on the same semi-level playing field.
 
The semi level playing field already exists. It's a culture problem... not a capitalist/socialist or racial problem. Generally speaking, the "symptoms" of being successful or not transcend race. Successful white and black people share many of the same characteristics and values, as do poor white and black people. Asian Americans tend to out perform both black and white...why is that? Is the system rigged for Asians?...nope.

The historiography of Asian Americans is very different than that of blacks.

 
You missed the point and your video is discussing something that was relevant in the past...not in 2020. I dont know if you believe that all white people keep inheriting free land or not. I haven't recieved a dime from my grandparents or parents...no wealth inheritance here and that goes for the far majority of people...but your trying to shift the discussion in a different direction.

Why is it that Asian Americans out perform white Americans when the "whites" have stacked this whole system for ourselves? Asians were used a slaves to build railroads, never given land, immigrants, yet they outperform everyone. Why?

Culture is the answer, not race or an invisible boogeyman keeping a group of people down against there will.

Culture is part of the answer but you can't ignore the reality that hundreds of years of slavery and another hundred of Jim Crow have had on the black community up to the present. It is very unique in this regard, and we as a country shouldn't try to sweep it under the carpet because its an inconvenient truth that makes us uncomfortable.
 
No part of my statements ignore the past and it doesnt make me uncomfortable in the sense its history and I had no part in it.

Culture and values is almost the whole part of it. Wealth is not always the measure of success. If you put a blindfold on and profile successful people they will all look pretty much the same...black, white, Asian...it doesnt matter....Similar values and characteristics.

What makes people unsuccessful in life or fail?...I know race/color isnt one of them. If that were the case then all white people would be successful and all black people would not be. So take out race and what is it?

It has everything to do with education, access to capital, cultural homogeneity, and individual initiative. The first two are directly applicable to race and where different groups in society are in terms of resources that help them live a better life.
 
A 90% tax on billionaires should do the trick, and would fund a vast majority of our needs in terms of infrastructure, healthcare, education etc.
Lets add funding the graft and corruption of the Dems..
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT