[nodoll]

>With a 2.5 trillion dollar tax cut...

So the idea is that this will be reinvested, leading to more productivity and job, which is a more sustainable way of getting rid of debt.

If you tax the rich, chances are that their business will cut spending, lay off people and increase unemployment. So while "Tax the rich" looks impressive if you are looking only superficially, it is not very sustainable.

[Tadpole9181]

I'm sorry, I'm not entertaining anyone who pushes trickle down trite at this point. It's so far beyond the point of pretending such claims are actually in good faith it's not even funny.

[UncleOxidant]

Somehow in the 1950s we had marginal tax rates on top earners that were like over 75%. And when the folks who talk about "making America great again" are asked what period of time they'd like to go back to they're usually thinking the 1950s.

[kevin_thibedeau]

It has a tiny bit of merit on the basis that limited wealth inequality creates opportunities for investment of the surplus capital in novel ways. Something that doesn't work well in planned economies with forced equality. What we have today with a small number of plutocrats hoarding all the wealth doesn't work because they're playing a game of exclusively enriching themselves with no incentive to trickle anything down.

[immibis]

There is a big space in between today's world and Harrison Bergeron. Somewhere in that space is probably the global optimum. False dichotomies are false.

[nodoll]

> no incentive to trickle anything down...

Of course you are not hoping they will do out of their good of their hearts.

They would naturally want to enrich themselves, and one way to do that is launch new business and employ people, which in turn leads to the transferring back of the wealth to the people. In this manner, this also boosts economy in ways that a simple tax hike would not.

[kevin_thibedeau]

This is the money that is supposed to trickle down. They are keeping it to themselves. Even more damning with data extending back to 1980.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1FIED

[nodoll]

>They are keeping it to themselves...

So how would this graph look if it did trickle down? Just curious..

[nodoll]

Is there some fundamental flaw with that idea, or are you rejecting it on the basis of some "reports" of the idea not having worked before?

[guru4consulting]

Trickle down theory is so old and boring. Instead, you can try this: If you tax the rich, they would lose sleep. If they lose sleep, they would be tired all the day and won't be able to work at optimal level. And if the rich do not work well, then the whole economy goes downhill. So, give them tax breaks and a good night sleep. It's good for the economy.

[nodoll]

On one hand, your idea has merit. But it is not without subtle risks. These could be mitigates by doing proper mitigation measures. But again, you cannot be sure how this will work out. May be the rich have some assets that they can sell off to meet the increased tax burden. This means that they don't have to manage those assets, which can contribute to reduced stress, which could lead to a better nights sleep. This will in turn cause them to wake up and exploit the worker class with increased vigor. But they could also use their now superfluous attention to engage in reddit or hackernews or watch youtube reels, and start zombifing and eventually end up being a d-crat..So who knows how it will work out.