Supply-Side Economics

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by whell

No, it's not. But I won't try to demonstrate otherwise. Sometimes folks just want to believe what they want to believe.

Its OK, I get it. You would rather regurgitate than actually discuss.

You still have not answered the primary question on supply side, how does one justify tax cuts with money that's needs to be borrowed. Businesses like mine does this all the time, we often borrow money for capital expenditure but these loans need to be guaranteed with underlying assets in private companies or financed by investors in public companies.

And where does a government get the money for the tax cuts or for that matter money for interest payments. Answer, government borrow even more for the debt service and this cost is borne by all the tax payers while the rich and the wealthy enjoy tax cuts from this government ruse.

Supply side is Trickle Down and it never trickles. Money gets sucked up and up like those tubes in drive by bank counters.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Thanks for proving my point. Supply-side theory is not political, as stated above. You can make it political if you wanna....and apparently you wanna.

BS. It's catechism among conservatives and a bogus rationalization of tax cuts for the wealthy without the promised attendant revenue increases by everyone else.

As for the espoused principle of supply-side theory that supply creates demand, I can think of only one commodity where that's true and it's bullshit. The GOP has an inexhaustible supply of bullshit to feed its demanding base and the base keeps wanting more.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

BS. It's catechism among conservatives and a bogus rationalization of tax cuts for the wealthy without the promised attendant revenue increases by everyone else.

As for the espoused principle of supply-side theory that supply creates demand, I can think of only one commodity where that's true and it's bullshit. The GOP has an inexhaustible supply of bullshit to feed its demanding base and the base keeps wanting more.

Well sir, I'm a conservative and that's obviously not my "catechism". But I'll let you have the last word - seems like it's one of the few things that make you feel better.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Its OK, I get it. You would rather regurgitate than actually discuss.

You still have not answered the primary question on supply side, how does one justify tax cuts with money that's needs to be borrowed. Businesses like mine does this all the time, we often borrow money for capital expenditure but these loans need to be guaranteed with underlying assets in private companies or financed by investors in public companies.

And where does a government get the money for the tax cuts or for that matter money for interest payments. Answer, government borrow even more for the debt service and this cost is borne by all the tax payers while the rich and the wealthy enjoy tax cuts from this government ruse.

Supply side is Trickle Down and it never trickles. Money gets sucked up and up like those tubes in drive by bank counters.

Not at all. I thought I had addressed these questions, but I'll give it another try.

how does one justify tax cuts with money that's needs to be borrowed. Businesses like mine does this all the time, we often borrow money for capital expenditure but these loans need to be guaranteed with underlying assets in private companies or financed by investors in public companies.

First, and once again, supply side theory has NOTHING to do with spending decisions. It's a theory about stimulating economic activity by making it less expensive/more attractive to convert capital into goods and services. Financing the operation of government is a separate and political process.

That said, the difference between your business and the government is that your business can't print its own money. The government backs its loans with an increasingly imaginary concept called "the full faith and credit of the United States Government.". This makes the government accountable to itself when financing spending with debt.

It's also, by the way, the same way the government justifies spending money it doesn't have: whether that spending is in the face of under-funding or under-spending the budget. We can argue about whether the government is underfunded or overspent, but when the Treasury sets new records every year on tax revenue collected, it's pretty hard to say the budget is underfunded.

And where does a government get the money for the tax cuts or for that matter money for interest payments. Answer, government borrow even more for the debt service and this cost is borne by all the tax payers while the rich and the wealthy enjoy tax cuts from this government ruse.

Except that's not what happens. Go back and look at the numbers. Marginal rates went down, and the amount of taxes paid increased.

[Dondilion]

Tax cutting for the rich was pushed based on the hope that it would engender more investment from that sector

However, what really occurred?

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Tax cutting for the rich was pushed based on the hope that it would engender more investment from that sector

However, what really occurred?

Mainly record profits plowed into record executive compensation, dividends, and stock buybacks. And stocks soared, and billionaire wealth exploded.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by whell

Not at all. I thought I had addressed these questions, but I'll give it another try.

Please don't bother.
When tax cuts are handed out with borrowed money, all current and future tax payers are in the hook for the amount added to the deficit. This no one cannot dispute.

As to what the tax cuts are used for, please see Post #766.

I have my own theory on these tax cuts the GOP pushes at least once every decade. Of course everyone loves a tax break so both parties join together (gets them the votes) to pass the most ill conceived of tax cuts. Debt payments need to be made, so cuts in spending ensue and we all know where. Eventually no more cuts to be made and the only option is tax increase and that's when the GOP "tax & spend" mantra begins and the voters are dumb enough to hand the reigns to the GOP for the next tax cut of the decade.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Please don't bother.
When tax cuts are handed out with borrowed money, all current and future tax payers are in the hook for the amount added to the deficit. This no one cannot dispute.

As to what the tax cuts are used for, please see Post #766.

I have my own theory on these tax cuts the GOP pushes at least once every decade. Of course everyone loves a tax break so both parties join together (gets them the votes) to pass the most ill conceived of tax cuts. Debt payments need to be made, so cuts in spending ensue and we all know where. Eventually no more cuts to be made and the only option is tax increase and that's when the GOP "tax & spend" mantra begins and the voters are dumb enough to hand the reigns to the GOP for the next tax cut of the decade.

https://www.cnsnews.com/article/wash...record-october

At the same time the federal government was collecting this $318,576,000,000 in record taxes for the month of October, the federal government was spending $406,374,000,000—thus, running up a deficit of $87,798,000,000 for the month.

Once again, revenue isn't the problem. Spending is the problem.

[Chicks]

Jeremy Hunt: Everyone will have to pay more tax
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63614124

Some Conservatives MPs have warned against increasing taxes, with former party leader Iain Duncan Smith telling Sky News it could lead to a "deeper" recession.

Addressing the concerns of his colleagues, Mr Hunt said the previous leadership had tried that approach, "in other words a plan that doesn't show how, in the long run, we can afford it".

"We have tried that, we saw it didn't work."

ROFL. Clearly, Tinkle-down doesn't work.

[Mark B]

Originally Posted by whell

https://www.cnsnews.com/article/wash...record-october

At the same time the federal government was collecting this $318,576,000,000 in record taxes for the month of October, the federal government was spending $406,374,000,000—thus, running up a deficit of $87,798,000,000 for the month.

Once again, revenue isn't the problem. Spending is the problem.

The federal deficit during Trumps presidency increased precipitously from the deficit during Obamas second term. Biden is lowering the deficit and it's much lower than the 3 trillion dollar deficit for fiscal year 2020 which was entirely within Trumps term. But you undoubtedly already knew that.