Liberals are scared of the tax cuts because of one thing:
The Realities of Economics!
This tax reform is the resurrection of supply-side/trickle-down economics, which have repeatedly been tried and repeatedly failed. It failed when Hoover did it, it failed when Reagan did and it failed when G.W. Bush did it. Reagan counterbalanced and camouflaged the failure by ballooning the deficit and pouring billions into the military industrial complex - a very Keynesian way of responding to the failure he caused. The 'trickle-down' part never happened at all.
Here's why supply-side doesn't work:
People hate risk!
Investments are rated as a balance of risk vs. potential profitability. As taxes are reduced, profitability effective increases. This means that investors will opt for lower risk investments - they can achieve their profit goals while accepting less risk. However, higher risk investments are the type that creates jobs and in many cases whole new industries. Low risk investments are in steady-state, low growth industries.
So despite the fact that lower taxes make it possible for investors to create economic growth, the reality is that they do not need to create economic growth - they opt to invest in lower risk investments - and the economy goes into a downward spiral.
History has shown that during periods of high taxation there is high economic growth. That's because investors MUST invest in higher risk venture in order to meet their profit goals.
Of course, MOST wealthy investors WANT lower risk investments with the higher effective profitability. They could care less about the economy as a whole or the state of average working Americans.
That's why they continue to push the BIG LIE called supply-side economics.
This tax reform is the resurrection of supply-side/trickle-down economics, which have repeatedly been tried and repeatedly failed. It failed when Hoover did it,
Hoover tried supply-side? Link?
My mistake, Hoover did not cut taxes. However, that's a very, very minor point to my argument. If you can't come up with anything more substantial to contradict my argument, you've conceded that I am correct.
My mistake, Hoover did not cut taxes. However, that's a very, very minor point to my argument.
Hoover had massive tax hikes.
Did that stop the depression?
If you can't come up with anything more substantial to contradict my argument
Harding/Coolidge slashed taxes, the economy boomed.
JFK/LBJ slashed taxes, the economy boomed.
Reagan slashed taxes, the economy boomed.
Reagan slashed taxes? Yes, but then he effectively raised taxes on corporations and the wealthy:
Tax Reform Act of 1986 - Wikipedia
While doing this he initialed massive government spending and ballooned the federal deficit. So attributing any economic boom (which wasn't all that much of a boom), to his tax cuts is nonsense.
The Kennedy/Johnson tax cuts - which were directed a primarily at individuals, not corporations, was the right thing to do at the right time. With a low federal deficit it was time to lower taxes - for individuals - and increase consumer spending.
Revenue Act of 1964 - Wikipedia
The problem with conservatives (among many, many other things) is that they believe that tax cuts are ALWAYS the right thing. Tax cuts are their religion. There is a time for tax cuts - when the federal deficit is low and the economy is in good shape. First you pay down the debt, then if the economy allows it, you cut taxes.
Unfortunately, Conservatives don't understand this - or just don't care. They NEVER will pay down the deficit because they keep giving tax cuts whenever the economy appears to be O.K. (and a lot of times when it isn't). This is the formula for an economic disaster.
First you pay down the deficit, then you give tax cuts. First you cut taxes for working people, then for corporations and finally for the wealthy.