UA-9726592-1
Showing posts with label supply side economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supply side economics. Show all posts

Friday, February 22, 2013

Middle-Out Economics 101: The faiure of supply side economics



For more on CAP’s Middle-Out Economics project, please visit its project page.


CAP Senior Economist Heather Boushey explains how middle-out economics helps bolster the U.S. economy.


Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Why supply side economics AKA trickle down never worked




Rightardia has mentioned without a strong middle class, demand is diminished. This is why,

Let's say a millionaire makes a million dollar in income. She or he might at best spend 10 per cent of his earnings on essentials like food, shelter, health care and transportation.

Suppose we take the same $ one million and give 20 people $50,000 each. Almost every one of these 20 will have to spend all that money to pay their bills for food , shelter health care, and transportation.

In the case of the millionaire, he might churn at best $100,000 back into the economy while the middle class Americana will have to put almost all of their income back in.

To add injury to insult, the millionaires also got a huge ta cut under GW Bush's supply side economics. In fact, the one per centers got a $64,000 tax cut under Dubya.

These cynical economics and GOP policies also cause a Great Recession.   In October, 2008, unemployment rose to 11.8%, its highest level in over 14 years. Long term unemployment was closer to 20 per cent.

So take out four of the 20 middle class earners who are now on unemployment during the Great Recession, and we only have 16 people who are now churning their $50K incomes back into the economy. The four on unemployment are are making less than  $15K per year while receiving unemployment compensation.

This affects businesses who then saw their customer bases cut back cut back by 20 per cent or more of people on unemployment. The great recession also unnerved the employed who became more cautious with their money, too.

What many business people learned during the Great Recession was that tax cuts are great, but they are far less desirable than a shrinking customer base that can force a company out of business. 

This is why supply side economic is a flawed economic theory. Polices that strengthen the middle class have a multiplier effect that is better for the economy than polices that concentrate wealth at the top in fewer hands.

This is why supply side economics never worked.


Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Republican Dirty Tricks: End of the Reagan Error


Rightardia has mentioned that the destruction of the middle class started with Ronald Reagan with his supply side economics that led to absurd tax cuts for the affluent.

This was coupled with deficit creating defense spending. GW Bush repeated the errors of Ronnie Raygun.

"For the majority of Americans, Reaganomics was a failure. Even Reagan’s own Budget Director admitted Reaganomics destroyed the economy by turning America from the most to the least upwardly mobile with the widest income gap of all industrialized nations. Stagnating wages and concentrating wealth at the top would be considered a failure if your mission was to create a society that works for all – not just billionaires.

The fact that the Republicans are STILL peddling their trickle-down voodoo speaks volumes that they simply have a different definition of “success.” Namely, the Republicans’ true constituency 'succeeds” when the rich get richer and the working class are permanently ensconced as the more malleable, compliant, and easily exploitable “working poor.'"
See Republican Dirty Tricks:

'via Blog this' Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Friday, August 10, 2012

The Center for American Progress and Mark Fiore: Once Upon a Trickle Down




Move over "Trickle Down," there's a new game in town. After 30 years of an economy geared toward the wealthy, the rest of us are waking up to the fact that a strong middle class is critical for robust economic growth.
Produced by the Center for American Progress and Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist Mark Fiore (http://www.markfiore.com).

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA Creative Commons License
Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

A simple explanation of Democratic and GOP tax concepts


As you can tell from the graph, the rise of he 1 per cent started with Ronald Reagan who slashed taxes below 30 per cent for top earning Americans. This trend continued when George HW bush was president.

When George W. Bush was president, he not only gave the one per cent a $64,000 a year tax cut. He also cut the short term capital gains tax to 15 per cent and suspended the estate tax.


The estate tax is an old tax established by Theodore. Roosevelt, a Republican president.


So three Republican presidents undid the tax reforms of FDR that weakened the middle calls. Many middle class teachers, firemen and police have lost heir jobs because the tax base was reduced.

In addition, the economy has suffered because the middle calls is the consumer class and when the middle class is weakened, businesses lose customers. 

Supply side economic might be a workable economic if it was oriented toward the middle calls. Giving the most affluent Americans huge tax breaks is counter-intuitive and simply doesn't work.

This is because the wealthy person may bank rather than spend the tax rebate or purchase gold and put it in a safe deposit box. The affluent could purchase stocks and bonds but this is an indirect way of stimulating the economy.

A direct grant or payment like food stamps or unemployment compensation gets more bang for the Federal tax buck and has a multiplier effect of the federal dollars because the recipient spends the money and rolls it back into the economy.

The following paragraph is verbatim form Wikipedia:


In congressional testimony given in July 2008, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Economy.com, provided estimates of the one-year multiplier effect for several fiscal policy options. 


The multipliers showed that any form of increased government spending would have more of a multiplier effect than any form of tax cuts. 


The most effective policy, a temporary increase in food stamps, had an estimated multiplier of 1.73. 


The lowest multiplier for a spending increase was general aid to state  governments, 1.36. 


Among tax cuts, multipliers ranged from 1.29 for a payroll tax holiday down to 0.27 for accelerated depreciation


Making the Bush tax cuts permanent had the second-lowest multiplier, 0.29. Refundable lump-sum tax rebates, the policy used in the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, had the second-largest multiplier for a tax cut, 1.26.


Obama's tax policies are based upon Keynesian economics and Mark Zandi's testimony. 

Republican tax policies are based on GOP ideology and unproven economic assumptions. 

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier

graphic: http://gulzar05.blogspot.com/2010/09/fiscal-multipliers-for-tax-cuts-and.html

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Techrepublic: This started with Reaganomics

The middle class con started with Reaganomics and supply side economics. George HW Bush continued the assault on the middle galls and his incompetent son, George W. nearly pushed the country into a depression with his ownership society. When the dust cleared the net wroth of the average American family plummeted nearly 40% to $77,300. 

Want some more of this? Elect Mitt Romney and see what happens.

see http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/11/news/economy/fed-family-net-worth/index.htm


Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Mitt has the one per cent solution for the economy



There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.

--GW Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002 

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Monday, May 28, 2012

The Mitt Romney economic stimulus plan: lottery tickets

It's the one per cent solution for America's ills. 

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
the Mitt romeny
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Thursday, April 12, 2012

The increasingly regressive US tax system


First of all, most US taxes are regressive. Municipal property tax and sales tax are flat and have limited impact on the affluent.

The cap on Social Security tax has been around since the inception of the programs and this tax has primarily been on the back of the middle class while private pensions have been disappearing from the workplace, Only 20 per cent of working Americans retire with a pension.

Then we have the special tax deals for the affluent. Most wealthy people don't work for a living and therefore don't pay income tax. These people benefit from capital gains an deferred interest that has a 15 per cent flat tax on it, far blow the average income tax rate that most Americans pay.

Think corporate taxes are too high? This is another GOP exaggeration.

Many corporation have off shored in the Netherlands or Ireland and pay a low corporate tax rate to those countries. The effective corporate tax rate in the US is 17.5 per cent, again well below what the average income tax that Americans pay.

The US has a regressive ta system courtesy of the GOP and supply side economics.
Besides being inherently unfair, the present tax system has been a big factor in the US deficit.

When the GOP holds the presidency, the deficit is rarely discussed. It only becomes an issue when a Democrat is in the White House.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Sunday, April 1, 2012

RDT: Haven't you got accustomed to the conservative hosing yet?


Republican Dirty Tricks explained:

To CONS, Americas greatness is measured by the power of a small pool of ruling elite that (“naturally”) owns and runs everything, and their ability to ride the large pool of economically-insecure cheap labor to the bank unfettered by the “pesky” government. 

 “Destroying America” to CONS would mean that We The People actually get to exercise the right to vote so many of us have bled and died for, and kick the CONS out of office. 

To CONS, “Destroying America” means the GENERAL WELFARE supersedes the welfare of the 1%.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA
Creative Commons License
Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Far Left Side: What happened to family income?


Rightardia attributes the decline of family income to the election of Ronald Reagan and his supply side economics that fractured the middle class.

Huge cuts in the marginal tax rates for the most affluent American cut federal revenues and produced an immense national debt.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA  

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Ireleand, the conservative poster child, falls on hard times

Ireland’s economy has undergone a remarkable transformation..Thomas L. Friedman of the NY Times  attributed Ireland’s economic growth in part to the country’s low corporate tax rate.

Ireland had been the second richest country in the European Union, with a per capita GDP higher than that of Germany, France and Britain. But in the mid-1980s, the economy was faltering, college graduates were emigrating, and the outlook was bleak:

"We went on a borrowing, spending and taxing spree, and that nearly drove us under," said Deputy Prime Minister Mary Harney. "It was because we nearly went under that we got the courage to change."

This change included a corporate tax rate cut to 12.5 percent, far below the rest of Europe, which attracted foreign investment. Nine of ten of the world's top pharmaceutical companies and seven of the top ten software designers now have operations in Ireland.

In 2001 the Tax Foundation hosted a delegation of congressional tax staff on a European tax conference that included a meeting with officials from Ireland’s Industrial Development Agency, who explained that the corporate tax rate cut had stimulated economic growth and new foreign investment.

Conservatives believed that making your corporate taxes low, simple and transparent; and by opening the  economy to competition, a country can become wealthy.

Even John McCain used Ireland as an example for his tax cut platform.

Today, you probably haven't seen many conservative articles touting the Irish miracle. Today, the news out of Ireland is far different. The country is suffering from huge deficits and debt, and near 14% unemployment.

Debt Crisis Casts Spotlight On Ireland's Low Taxes

The Irish government indicates the tax base was way too small for the economy, and too many people weren't paying taxes,  Without a tax base, the economy and goverment just couldn't run.

According to Wikipedia, The Irish economy expanded rapidly during the Celtic Tiger years up to 2007 due to low interest rates among other causes. This led to an expansion of credit and included a property bubble which began to end in 2007. Irish banks, already over-exposed to the Irish property market, came under severe pressure in September 2008 due to the global financial crisis of 2007–2010.

Wikipedia also stated that The Republic of Ireland entered into an economic depression in 2009. The Economic and Social  Research Institute predicted an economic contraction of 14% by 2010. In the first quarter in 2009, GDP was down 8.5% from the same quarter the previous year, and GNP down 12%.
Unemployment is up 8.75% to 11.4%. The economy exited the recession in the third quarter of 2009 . . .

Ireland is now the poster child for the excesses of supply side economics which is based on a low tax rate. Because the low tax rate hobbled the Irish government, it was not able to do much for  the country much when the economic hard times occurred.

This in many respects is  a lesson that conservatives should understand form the Bible.

The seven years of plenty, that were in the land of Egypt, came to an end.And Joseph opened all places in which there was food" - all the stores in every city. "And sold unto Mizaim." The stores under Pharaoh's hand were public property, obtained either by lawful taxation or by purchase.

It was a great public benefit to sell this grain, that had been providently kept in store, at a moderate price, and thus preserve the lives of a nation during a seven years' of famine.

"All the land." This is to be understood of the countries in the neighborhood of Egypt. Famines in these countries were not unusual. We have read already of two famines in Palestine that did not extend to Egypt Genesis 12:10; Genesis 26:1.

The point that Righatrdia is trying to make is that the government can leave its citizens on their own with low taxes, but when an emergency occurs, it will be unable to help much.

The Egyptians taxed its citizens and bought grain that it put in storage for a rainy day. When the hard times followed, the grain stores were opened and the government survived. In Ireland the ruling political party fell to third place for the first time in Irish history after the economy had faltered. 

sources:  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=126614692, http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?p=3147659 and http://bible.cc/genesis/41-53.htm

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Media Matters for America: Fox continues to deny aid to poor is stimulative

October 07, 2010 1:38 pm ET
 

Fox News hosts and contributors have recently dismissed estimates of food stamp programs' stimulative effect on the economy as "some strange multiplier effect study," "liberal math" and a "complicated economic multiplier theory." In fact, economists agree that food stamps are one of "the most effective ways to prime the economy's pump."

Malkin, Gingrich and Varney all dismiss economic theory to continue attacking food stamps

Malkin falsely claims "the only thing that these programs stimulate, of course, is a bigger government." On the October 7 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy stated that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said of food stamps: "It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance."

Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin replied by saying she would "like to know which economist [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] is talking to. Of course, she's promoting some strange multiplier effect study to argue this." Malkin concluded by falsely claiming "the only thing that these programs stimulate, of course, is bigger government."

Varney dismisses economic consensus regarding stimulative nature of food stamps as a "complicated economic multiplier theory." Earlier on Fox & Friends, Fox Business Network anchor Stuart Varney dismissed Pelosi's statement as "the complicated economic multiplier theory that they're bringing in here."

Varney claimed "the evidence that's before us" showing that a high proportion of the unemployed are on food stamps and unemployment is still high shows "it would seem you don't get bigger bang for the buck."

Varney hosts Santorum to attack food stamps and claim that "the numbers are phony." On the October 7 edition of Fox Business Network's Varney & Company, contributor Tracy Byrnes attributed Pelosi's claim to "the health care calculator that they use...the keys are not working correctly if she's thinking this is the best bang for our buck."

Fox News contributor Rick Santorum then stated of Pelosi's claim: "So if that's the case, why don't we turn the whole economy over to the government have them pay out all of this money and have a great multiplier effect.

It doesn't work and in fact there have been studies done show just the opposite." Santorum further claimed "I don't know where she's getting the funny numbers, the calculator is not working as Tracy said, but the numbers are phony."

Trickle Down used to be called Horse and Sparrow economics


The economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory".

Galbrath wrote, "Mr. David Stockman has said that  supply-side  economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic  policy.  What an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: "If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows."

source: Csaba, Usenet Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 19:20:40 

Trickle down is the "horse shit" school of economics.
Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 8377 
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Businesses claim they are not hiring because of slow consumer spending

With consumers slow to spend, businesses are slow to hire
CHICAGO -- Corporate profits are soaring. Companies are sitting on billions of dollars of cash. And still, they've yet to start hiring or make major investments.

Many Democrats say the economy needs more stimulus. Business lobbyists and their Republican allies say it needs less regulation and lower taxes.

But here in the heartland of America, senior executives say neither side's assessment fits.

They blame their profound caution on their view that U.S. consumers are destined to disappoint for many years. As a result, they say, the economy is unlikely to see the kind of almost unbroken prosperity of the quarter-century that preceded the financial crisis.

Why is consumer spending flagging. A lot of this has to do with Supply Side economics that have weakened the middle class. Cenk Uygur was conducting an MSNBC interview. The interviewee pointed out that he used to be focused on tax cuts until he realized his business couldn't make a profit without customers buying his product or services. 

Supply Side (SS) economics is really blind to importance of consumers to business. The Republican tax breaks are essentially a  subsidy to large corporations and small businesses that assume the businessman are selling the products and services to consumers. Tax breaks to middle class and low income earner under SS economics is modest.

Tax breaks are pointless if profits drop. In addition, Moody's Economics conducted a study which shows that permanent and temporary tax cuts are far less stimulative than food Stamps and unemployment compensation that provide purchasing power to consumers and are quickly rolled back into the economy.

According to the Washington Post, senior executives said they see Americans for years ahead paying down debts incurred during the now-ended credit boom and adjusting spending to match their often-reduced incomes.

Again we have an oversimplification of the problem. The Federal Reserve completed a study that showed the Supply Side Reaganomics devastated the middle class. One third became affluent and the other two thirds reversed or treadled water.

The fate of the middle class did not improve greatly during the Clinton years either.  Bush finished off the middle class during his eight year presidency with his 'tax cuts' that doubled the deficit.

During the  Bush inaugural address , he stated:

“This is an impressive crowd: the Have's and Have-more's. Some people call you the elites. I call you my base.”


It is is an impressive crowd. The top one per cent Americans now haul in 50 per cent of the income and own 90 per cent of the wealth. The only thing would fix the American economy would be huge tax increase on the affluent. This is essentially what FDR did during the Great Depression and World War 2. The top US income earners were in the 90 per cent tax bracket. 

Can the US work its way out of the Great recession. This is doubtful. Banks make their profits by moving paper around and most of the industrial base of the US has been offshored.

Will Democrats have the balls to tax the affluent? That is also doubtful. Most Democrats think even a 40 per cent tax on top income earners is risky.

Executives see little evidence that the economy is slipping back into recession. But they describe a business environment in which sales come in fits and starts and their customers can't predict what they will want to buy in the future.

Why is this? Because the vast middle class that make up the bulk of consumers is broke. SS economics will neither help the affluent or the middle class in present predicament the US is in. Income tax cuts won't help businesses that aren't making money.

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/20/AR2010082005165.html?hpid=topnews
Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank:9779 
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Sunday, August 1, 2010

Alan Greenspan: Extending Bush Tax Cuts Without Paying For Them Could Be 'Disastrous'

Sam Stein
stein@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting First Posted: 08- 1-10 11:46 AM |
Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan said that the push by congressional Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts without offsetting the costs elsewhere could end up being "disastrous" for the economy.

In an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Greenspan expressed his disagreement with the conservative argument that tax cuts essentially pay for themselves by generating revenue and productivity. . .
"They do not," said Greenspan.

"I'm very much in favor of tax cuts but not with borrowed money and the problem that we have gotten into in recent years is spending programs with borrowed money, tax cuts with borrowed money," he said. . . My view is I don't think we can play subtle policy here."

The comments from the former Fed chief were an elaboration of a position he outlined in an interview earlier in the week. Speaking with PBS' Judy Woodruff, Greenspan expressed his opposition to passing legislation that would hold tax rates steady (under law the tax cuts Bush passed ten years ago are going to expire, thereby bringing rates back to Clinton-era levels).

President Obama has pledged to continue the tax breaks for those individuals making under $200,000 and those families earning less than $250,000.

But Republicans want the entire package kept in place. Even so, they have declined to say how they would pay for it, saying, in part, that keeping the Bush tax cuts in place will pay for itself.

Greenspan also weighed in on broader economic issues and trends. The former Fed Chairman relayed some sobering economic predictions, saying he expected the nation's unemployment rate to remain at its current level, mainly because there were few tools left to change it.

David Stockman, the former Director of the Office of Management and Budget (1981–1985), also said:

IF there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. . . It is therefore unseemly for the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, to insist that the nation’s wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 14896

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Sunday, June 13, 2010

How to make trickle down work


Democrats will have the opportunity to make trickle down or Supply side economics work in December when the Bush tax cuts expire in December 2010.

Once these regressive tax cuts expire, The Estate tax will be restored and the tax tables will be revised upward for any families making more than $250,000 a year.

If an affluent American like a billionaire or millionaire is liquidated, his or her estate will be subject to the Estate Tax. After the federal government starts to collect these taxes, it will be better able to balance the federal budget and reduce the deficit and national debt.

The federal government, for the most part, is required to spend all of its tax revenues before the end of the fiscal year which is September 30.

This will spread the wealth around and help teachers, fire fighters and police to keep their jobs. It will also help rebuild the American infrastructure.

Democrats, anarchists, militia members and other radicals can make America stronger by liquidating a millionaire or billionaire. These people are the real enemies of the American way.

Of course, if you are caught by the police, the penalty can be severe. Take care when you perform your patriotic duty.

Read the blog description before you take any action you might later regret.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu 

Netcraft rank: 13506 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com