Another look at 10 men getting a discount on a $100 meal (tax cuts)

[Maetryx]

http://andrewtobias.com/newcolumns/030120.html

Andrew Tobias points out some bad assumptions in the popular tax cut parable. Andrew Tobias is the author of The Only Investment Guide You'll Ever Need and is the Treasurer of the DNC. Most people assume he is a conservative because of his career in financial journalism.

Anyway, as a conservative myself, I tend to turn to Mr. Tobias' website to get the other side of the story.

The most remarkable thing about this idiotic thing about the 10 men having the $100 dinner is that it seems to be passed around the Internet not, for the most part, by people with adjusted gross incomes in excess of $383,000 a year (the top 1%), but, rather, by people so eager for $1,000 and $2,000 tax cuts that they don?t bother to take into account the extra $20,000 or $40,000 in national debt they and their children will be taking on in return ? money borrowed largely to give much, much larger tax cuts to people like George Bush (whose annual tax savings have been estimated at $44,500) and Dick Cheney ($327,000). Not to mention the really rich.

 

[Maetryx]

Another look...

 

[DaveSimmons]

But Cheney needs the extra $327,000 so he can "trickle down" on the little guys.

 

[Maetryx]

I *want* to believe in trickle down economics, but I've read a book by Paul Krueger that basically shows that it doesn't work. He's the author of _The Accidental Theorist_, but that's not the book I'm thinking of. Can't think of the title....

_Peddling Propserity_. That's the one I'm thinking of.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Trickle down does work, however it is only a trickle.

Standard rule of thumb (back when I was taking economics in college - pre Regan) is that every $ invested in direct purchasing generates a return of $3 within the economy (bottom up spending).

Trickle down seems to be that in reverse. It takes $3 to force $1 back into the economy. Items purchased in the trickle down mode do not generate the recycled monetary value. Usually these purchase are high end (excessive cost and profit) or just invested back into the finance system as paper profits.

 

[BooneRebel]

Tobias is an idiot.

 

[NakaNaka]

Originally posted by: Maetryx
I *want* to believe in trickle down economics, but I've read a book by Paul Krueger that basically shows that it doesn't work. He's the author of _The Accidental Theorist_, but that's not the book I'm thinking of. Can't think of the title....

_Peddling Propserity_. That's the one I'm thinking of.

Yea - I think it has been proven that trickle down economics doesn't work. It was named something different in the 80's and they changed the name but it is still the same principle.

 

[rockyct]

Originally posted by: BooneRebel
Tobias is an idiot.

I disagree.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Maetryx
http://andrewtobias.com/newcolumns/030120.html

Andrew Tobias points out some bad assumptions in the popular tax cut parable. Andrew Tobias is the author of The Only Investment Guide You'll Ever Need and is the Treasurer of the DNC. Most people assume he is a conservative because of his career in financial journalism.

Anyway, as a conservative myself, I tend to turn to Mr. Tobias' website to get the other side of the story.

The most remarkable thing about this idiotic thing about the 10 men having the $100 dinner is that it seems to be passed around the Internet not, for the most part, by people with adjusted gross incomes in excess of $383,000 a year (the top 1%), but, rather, by people so eager for $1,000 and $2,000 tax cuts that they don?t bother to take into account the extra $20,000 or $40,000 in national debt they and their children will be taking on in return ? money borrowed largely to give much, much larger tax cuts to people like George Bush (whose annual tax savings have been estimated at $44,500) and Dick Cheney ($327,000). Not to mention the really rich.

I would glady take a tax increase instead of a tax cut, if I new the goverment would be responsable with my money. But even in the years we had surpluses, the national debt rose, when in theory it should have at the very least stayed the same or contracted.

Until congress starts showing fiscal responsability, I demand my money back. I need this money to help plan my retirment since social security will long be insolvent before I retire.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Trickle down does work, however it is only a trickle.

Standard rule of thumb (back when I was taking economics in college - pre Regan) is that every $ invested in direct purchasing generates a return of $3 within the economy (bottom up spending).

Trickle down seems to be that in reverse. It takes $3 to force $1 back into the economy. Items purchased in the trickle down mode do not generate the recycled monetary value. Usually these purchase are high end (excessive cost and profit) or just invested back into the finance system as paper profits.

And I have to ask, what is the point of investments? Investments cause spending elsewhere, so it is more than just paper profits.