Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Fact or fiction...
Republican economic policy always prioritizes (favors) the wealthy over the poor and middle-class.
Please discuss with real world examples, and keep it clean.
Fact or fiction...
Republican economic policy always prioritizes (favors) the wealthy over the poor and middle-class.
Please discuss with real world examples, and keep it clean.
Fact.
Example - Bush tax cuts.
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
So, the Obama's extension of the tax cuts for the rich must similarly prove that -His- economic policies -also- favor the wealthy over the poor and middle class.Fact.Fact or fiction...
Republican economic policy always prioritizes (favors) the wealthy over the poor and middle-class.
Please discuss with real world examples, and keep it clean.
Example - Bush tax cuts.
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
I've heard this theory, packaged and repackaged about a thousand times. It still boils down to: help the wealthy directly and that in turn will help everyone eventually. But from a factual perspective, it does not refute the statement in the OP, but actually agrees with it.
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
I've heard this theory, packaged and repackaged about a thousand times. It still boils down to: help the wealthy directly and that in turn will help everyone eventually. But from a factual perspective, it does not refute the statement in the OP, but actually agrees with it.
I would see it as boiling down to which pathway does the money take, and which one brings about the greater good. The progressive model is to take the money through the government and distrbute it to those on the lower end, either directly or indirectly. What this creates is a larger buracracy (they have to have someone run it) and in the cases of direct welfare or tax credits at the low end, zero productivity for the money spent.
Now lets look at a supply side model. Say that you tax a person 200k less and they go out and buy a mercedes. Now the salesman makes money, the dealers owner makes money, the car manufacter and thier employees make money. Those people in turn now go out and spend money as well, the government gets a cut anyway via taxes at each level.
The main difference is now the rich person has a mercedes, and to me, evny over that is a big part of why people want to "Tax the Rich"
Fact or fiction...
Republican economic policy always prioritizes (favors) the wealthy over the poor and middle-class.
Please discuss with real world examples, and keep it clean.
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
I've heard this theory, packaged and repackaged about a thousand times. It still boils down to: help the wealthy directly and that in turn will help everyone eventually. But from a factual perspective, it does not refute the statement in the OP, but actually agrees with it.
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
I've heard this theory, packaged and repackaged about a thousand times. It still boils down to: help the wealthy directly and that in turn will help everyone eventually. But from a factual perspective, it does not refute the statement in the OP, but actually agrees with it.
Republican policy is not to help the wealthy, much as the liberals would have us believe. The simple truth is that there is no other way to grow an economy and create more jobs than implementing the policies that are being advanced by the GOP. It's not a question of helping the wealthy, ANY policy that fosters growth is going to help the wealthy because they have the most money to invest. They're going to get the lion's share of the profits generated from economic growth, that's just the way it is. And gov't interference in this only serves to dampen the growth prospects.
Any proof that Bush tax cuts increased jobs? Obama extended tax cuts going on two years ago. total of going on ten years and fewer jobs..
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.
I've heard this theory, packaged and repackaged about a thousand times. It still boils down to: help the wealthy directly and that in turn will help everyone eventually. But from a factual perspective, it does not refute the statement in the OP, but actually agrees with it.
I would see it as boiling down to which pathway does the money take, and which one brings about the greater good. The progressive model is to take the money through the government and distrbute it to those on the lower end, either directly or indirectly. What this creates is a larger buracracy (they have to have someone run it) and in the cases of direct welfare or tax credits at the low end, zero productivity for the money spent.
Now lets look at a supply side model. Say that you tax a person 200k less and they go out and buy a mercedes. Now the salesman makes money, the dealers owner makes money, the car manufacter and thier employees make money. Those people in turn now go out and spend money as well, the government gets a cut anyway via taxes at each level.
The main difference is now the rich person has a mercedes, and to me, evny over that is a big part of why people want to "Tax the Rich"
The multiplier effect can work both ways, even if you paint it as the villain and one context and the savior in another. You're suggesting that an extra dollar in the pocket of a rich man is worth more to the economy than an extra dollar in the pocket of a poor man. But that theory has never been proven either way.
I've heard this theory, packaged and repackaged about a thousand times. It still boils down to: help the wealthy directly and that in turn will help everyone eventually. But from a factual perspective, it does not refute the statement in the OP, but actually agrees with it.
Republican policy is not to help the wealthy, much as the liberals would have us believe. The simple truth is that there is no other way to grow an economy and create more jobs than implementing the policies that are being advanced by the GOP. It's not a question of helping the wealthy, ANY policy that fosters growth is going to help the wealthy because they have the most money to invest. They're going to get the lion's share of the profits generated from economic growth, that's just the way it is. And gov't interference in this only serves to dampen the growth prospects.
At what point does tax cuts for the wealthy begin to hurt economic growth?
I would see it as boiling down to which pathway does the money take, and which one brings about the greater good. The progressive model is to take the money through the government and distrbute it to those on the lower end, either directly or indirectly. What this creates is a larger buracracy (they have to have someone run it) and in the cases of direct welfare or tax credits at the low end, zero productivity for the money spent.
Now lets look at a supply side model. Say that you tax a person 200k less and they go out and buy a mercedes. Now the salesman makes money, the dealers owner makes money, the car manufacter and thier employees make money. Those people in turn now go out and spend money as well, the government gets a cut anyway via taxes at each level.
The main difference is now the rich person has a mercedes, and to me, evny over that is a big part of why people want to "Tax the Rich"
The multiplier effect can work both ways, even if you paint it as the villain and one context and the savior in another. You're suggesting that an extra dollar in the pocket of a rich man is worth more to the economy than an extra dollar in the pocket of a poor man. But that theory has never been proven either way.
The way I see it that extra dollar in the rich mans pocket leads to productivity down the chain, thus keeping the economy moving at multiple levels.
The extra dollar in the poor mans pocket nets you no return productivity.
Fact or fiction...
Republican economic policy always prioritizes (favors) the wealthy over the poor and middle-class.
Please discuss with real world examples, and keep it clean.
Did you ever get a job from a poor person?
Any proof that Bush tax cuts increased jobs? Obama extended tax cuts going on two years ago. total of going on ten years and fewer jobs..
Republican economic policy favors everybody because it promotes more economic growth and more jobs. It enables more upward mobility and a more opportunistic environment where people have a better chance to improved their lot in life. Which leads to greater personal and societal stability for everybody.
The Bush tax cuts mentioned above lead to increased well-being for everybody from 2003 until the recession hit. As did the Reagan tax cuts back in the early 80s. The republican economic policy's main objective is to foster and improve the business climate; if that is not done, the current economic mess cannot improve to any appreciable degree.