Why Congress Must Extend Jobless Benefits But Not Tax Cuts For the Rich(robertreich.org)
robertreich.org
Why Congress Must Extend Jobless Benefits But Not Tax Cuts For the Rich
http://robertreich.org/post/1601480347
3 comments
More Reich Rubbish. He takes it as a matter of faith that "tax cuts don't trickle down". He conveniently ignores how the tax cuts defined "the rich" in such a way that almost every business owner in the United States is "the rich".
I don't care what side of the political spectrum you are on: when employers face higher overhead, they are required to cut back or go out of business. This is not politics. It is simple economics whether you are a keynsian, friedian, or austrian.
I do not hear Reich complaining about the massive bail-outs for the truly rich which both the Bush and Obama administrations handed out like free candy. Now there are some billions that have truly failed to "trickle down".
I don't care what side of the political spectrum you are on: when employers face higher overhead, they are required to cut back or go out of business. This is not politics. It is simple economics whether you are a keynsian, friedian, or austrian.
I do not hear Reich complaining about the massive bail-outs for the truly rich which both the Bush and Obama administrations handed out like free candy. Now there are some billions that have truly failed to "trickle down".
Excellent reddit.com/r/politics post
Moreover, the top 1 percent spends a small fraction of their income. That’s what it means to be rich — you already have most of what you want. So extending the Bush tax cut to them won’t stimulate the economy.
Yet people without jobs, and their families, are likely to spend every penny of unemployment benefits they receive. That will go back into the economy and save or create jobs."
Fundamentally, this is the reason the rich don't stimulate the economy - we've tried that in the past (trickle down, anyone?) it doesn't work.
Anyone else up for a holiday reading of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" ?