Trickle Down Economics has never seemed like a justifiable reason to create a tax cut for the rich, to me. The wealthy got wealthy by scrimping, saving, and being frugal, didn't they? Wealth is measured by how much money one has stored in investments, right? Not by how many curvy little cars and outlandish pipe organs one owns. It is my belief that the wealthy don't necessarily buy huge, expensive things when they get a tax break. It isn't characteristic, it seems. So, why does the government seem to support Trickle Down Economics? Trickle Up Economics would be more beneficial, I think. If middle class workers had extra money in their pockets, it wouldn't automatically go into savings bonds, or wherever. It'd go into the grocery bill or towards Disney World or tuition. Shouldn't the people spending money be the people getting tax breaks?
Slashdot Mirror
Trickle Down Economics has never seemed like a justifiable reason to create a tax cut for the rich, to me. The wealthy got wealthy by scrimping, saving, and being frugal, didn't they? Wealth is measured by how much money one has stored in investments, right? Not by how many curvy little cars and outlandish pipe organs one owns. It is my belief that the wealthy don't necessarily buy huge, expensive things when they get a tax break. It isn't characteristic, it seems. So, why does the government seem to support Trickle Down Economics? Trickle Up Economics would be more beneficial, I think. If middle class workers had extra money in their pockets, it wouldn't automatically go into savings bonds, or wherever. It'd go into the grocery bill or towards Disney World or tuition. Shouldn't the people spending money be the people getting tax breaks?