Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
A ridiculous and slanted definition of supply side economics by WaPo, but coming from them I'm not surprised. At best, this is an opinion piece, but here it is in their News section Typical.
|
Show me where in the article there is a 'slanted' definition of supply side economics. From the article:
Quote:
|
The 1970s witnessed the emergence of a new strain of Republican economic orthodoxy. Economist Arthur Laffer famously sketched a curve on a cocktail napkin to demonstrate how cutting taxes might actually raise government revenue — a win-win that would prevent any need for tough choices. Journalist Jude Wanniski helped popularize this new theory — supply-side economics — arguing that Republicans needed to become the “Santa Claus” of tax cuts (in contrast to the Democrats’ Santa Claus of government spending), abandoning the idea of fiscal discipline and the practice of balanced budgets that Republicans like President Dwight D. Eisenhower had been promoting for decades.
|
Isn't this what Reagan adopted and began the era of deficit funding of government, except he called it Trickle Down Economics. IIRC, Bush1 called it Voodoo economics. Then Bush2 and Trump adopted this Voodoo economics and more tax cuts for the wealthy ensued and deficits soared.
The way I see it, Bill Clinton righted the economic disaster Reagan caused which Dubya promptly blew it up with his tax cuts and his search for WMDs. Then Obama came along and fixed Dubya's economic miracle and then the Moron happened, tax cuts ensued.