“Trickle down economics” was not invented by conservatives in the 1980s. There was never any such economic theory advocated. The term was always a strawman, popularized by Democrats who opposed the policies of Reagan and free market economists.
▪️Economist Thomas Sowell pointed out years ago that there is no such recorded theory found anywhere in economics. No one actually believed that if you give rich people money it would “trickle down” to the poor, that’s a strawman invented by Democrats.
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/Sowell_TrickleDown_FINAL.pdf
▪️Those who advocated for lower tax rates did so for two main reasons. One, that the economy will be stronger if people keep more of their money, which will be used to invest in businesses, equipment and innovation instead of frittered away by the government.
▪️Two, lowering tax rates incentivizes working more and/or spending less time & energy sheltering money from taxes. Thus, the net effect will be the same or even more tax revenue. This was JFK’s argument to lower the top rate (which conveniently wasn’t labeled “trickle down.”)
▪️The whole trickle down narrative is a myth. There hasn’t been any such massive decrease in tax percentages paid by the rich. The chart from the CBO clearly shows this (posted in comments). The only notable reduction in taxes has ironically been in the lowest quintile.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58781#_idTextAnchor054
▪️In fact, the lowest quintile has a negative tax rate, while the highest quintile has the highest rate by far, even factoring in payroll and excise taxes (chart also posted in comments). In other words, the only trickle down theory in practice is via government taxation sending money to the poor.
As with the leftist freak out over “banned books” this is not banning books, it’s still easy to get Harry Potter and bookstores should be able to limit whatever books they want for whatever reason. But not only does it show a double standard, the rationale is far less justifiable than removing certain content from school libraries. At least there the justification was the content of certain books are inappropriate for children, clearly not every book should be available in a school library. Here, there’s no argument about the content they just don’t like the author’s politics!
Because news came out about his letter to the FBI, revealing he was a nutcase. The letter was rambling and incoherent, claiming he was trained by the US military off the books, and that Walz had instructed him to kill Amy Klobuchar so he could run for Senate. None of it made any sense (Walz is not running for Senate) and none of the assassinations made any sense, even in a diabolical way.
Nearly all of his hit list was Democrats (including Walz) and abortion clinics, but he was supposedly working for Walz?! Plus, one of the guys he killed wasn’t even on his list, and others were no longer in office or deceased. None of it makes sense from any coherent angle.
Basically, it appears the guy was mentally ill and neither the left or right can use the incident to push their agendas anymore, so the story was dropped.
This is so dumb. First, this means LA began as Spanish land founded to support Spanish missions (i.e. colonialism). Which contradicts their entire premise. But the reality is that Los Angeles is a quintessential American city.
▪️When the US acquired California in the 1840s, LA was a small town of less than 2,000 people. It was basically nothing. It became large only after the gold rush and the railroads completed in the 1870-80s, which brought thousands of new settlers and a booming commercial center.
▪️But LA had a major issue limiting its growth, no water. It wasn’t until Mulholland found a water source and built an aqueduct down from Northern California that LA had the infrastructure to grow into a major city.
▪️Then, a combination of oil, real estate and the film industry caused it to boom in the early 1900s. Post WWII, industries like aerospace continued its spectacular growth. Calling this “Mexican land” is a brain dead take. Neither the Mexicans, Spanish nor ...
