Ernie S.
Diamond Member
A good part of it, yes.1) Will they spend it on yachts,planes, more houses?
The yacht will take 18 months to build and employ probably 50 people directly and hundreds of others will have minor roles.
Same thing with the plane and the houses. Take a guy like Rush Limbaugh. His discretionary spending probably employs a couple hundred people. Increase his taxes and 50 or 60 jobs go away. Now those people have less to spend and 5 or 6 more jobs disappear.
If the rich invest their cash, it will be used to expand businesses, buy machinery hire help; you know actually expand the economy.
Even if the money is only placed in savings accounts, that money does not sit in a vault somewhere. It is invested by the banks or lent to people who want to purchase homes, yachts, cars.... all kinds of things that provide jobs.
Of course, all of this commerce, all of these salaries are taxed, providing tangible assets (wealth) and a positive cash flow to the Treasury.
Liberal wisdom says the government knows better how to spend that money by redistribution. The problem is that when government spends money, it's essentially gone. No wealth, no tangible asset has been created and little if any money gets back to the Treasury in the form of taxes, resulting in a net drain on the economy.