We could have a meaningful debate about taxes/gov if proper phrasing was used. Taxes aren't "punishment" and government spending isn't "waste". Taxes are payment for services rendered (past and future) and government spending is for maintenance of a civil society and investment in the future. E.g. roads to bring goods to market and education so the rich guy's company have people to hire. The rich (often, maybe not always) benefit disproportionately so they pay more.Just because you call it with a perjorative "trickle down economics" doesn't change that essentially you just want to screw the rich because they're rich. It's not about funding needs, or equitable taxation, or anything else. Income tax burden of the bottom 90% has gone down steadily over the past few decades but that's not enough since your entire worldview is based upon knocking down the rich a few pegs. Which is why this is sad, progressives have an argument that's basically correct (we're at the point of diminishing returns for cuts to top rates, we're not starting from a 70% top bracket anymore) but ruin it with class warfare tactics. Yeah rich people might get some tax relief but guess what, that's OK because they're citizens too; hoarding every bit of tax relief for just the poor or middle classes and withholding it from the rich is both bad policy and mere spiteful behavior
If the GOP are willing to say we should use less money to maintain the already crumbling infrastructure that puts the US behind other countries, or on education so the US has to import more high-skilled workers that at least they'd be honest. Just saying "spending" as some unspecified, evil thing is pointless.