|
10-05-2016
|
95
|
|
PigParty🐷
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PigPen
Posts: 2,913
|
|
But that's exactly what Trump wants to do. Cut the taxes of the wealthy and expect the middle/lower classes to benefit, it's the definition of wealth trickling down (except it doesn't).
The article you cited states that "Higher taxes on the rich mean that those people have less wealth to invest, donate, and spend, while the government has more for its purposes.".
When reducing taxes this simply doesn't happen because it relies on the wealthy spending their extra income within the US economy when in reality there are tons of leakages that occur. The government on the other hand are capable of making investments within the economy which stimulate growth.
|
You shouldn't selectively read that article.
Here's a quote from it:
In a free society, wealth doesn’t trickle down, or up, or sideways. It is earned.
What people like Obama don’t understand or won’t admit, is that people of all economic strata, and no matter their race, religion, sex, or anything else, have far more opportunities to earn in a society with a small, efficient, frugal government than they do in a society with a huge, wasteful one.
The tax cuts during the Reagan administration somewhat increased the resources of the taxpayers, while at the same time, repeal of some regulations gave them more freedom to take advantage of opportunities for gain through exchange. The result was a large increase in production and employment. Increasing wealth did not “trickle” to anyone, but the climate of freer markets enabled many Americans to earn more. Some who had previously been poor found jobs that paid well, saved money so they’d have investment capital, and then began their own businesses. Their increased incomes were a gusher, not a trickle, and it was earned.
|
It's funny. The very next sentence after the one you quoted from the article directly contradicts the point you were trying to make with your selective quoting.
|
Higher taxes on the rich mean that those people have less wealth to invest, donate, and spend, while the government has more for its purposes. The taxpayers usually are pretty careful with their own money, but politicians are notorious for squandering it.
|
|
|
|
|