Anonymous
ID: m1u6U/LX
7/20/2025, 2:34:20 AM No.510847334
A major 2020 study covering 50 years and 18 wealthy countries found that tax cuts for the rich:
1) Did not increase real GDP per capita or employment, and
2) Made inequality worse
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/23/tax-cuts-rich-trickle-down/
IMF and OECD reports similarly conclude that redistributing income toward the middle class boosts growth, while favoring the top end does not.
The 1970s–1980s US tax cuts (Reagan era) increased inequality, while economic growth and wage gains were modest for most people.
The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA):
1) Did not lead to sustained increases in business investment or wages.
2) Instead, much of the benefit flowed into stock buybacks and dividends, not expanded operations .
3) Over 84% of corporate economists reported no change in investment or hiring plans after the cut
The Kansas Experiment—a cautionary example
1) Kansas eliminated income tax on “pass-through” business earnings.
2) Result: Employment and GDP growth lagged compared to similar states—one study found growth was about 7.8% lower, with 2.6% fewer jobs.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12799
Academic consensus and fiscal multipliers
1) Economic models show that government spending (e.g., infrastructure, social transfers) delivers far higher short‑term stimulus than tax cuts for the wealthy or corporations.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trickle-down-economics-and-broken-promises/
2) Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz and others have endorsed “trickle-up” strategies: broaden growth by boosting middle and lower incomes, rather than relying on wealth accumulating at the top.
1) Did not increase real GDP per capita or employment, and
2) Made inequality worse
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/23/tax-cuts-rich-trickle-down/
IMF and OECD reports similarly conclude that redistributing income toward the middle class boosts growth, while favoring the top end does not.
The 1970s–1980s US tax cuts (Reagan era) increased inequality, while economic growth and wage gains were modest for most people.
The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA):
1) Did not lead to sustained increases in business investment or wages.
2) Instead, much of the benefit flowed into stock buybacks and dividends, not expanded operations .
3) Over 84% of corporate economists reported no change in investment or hiring plans after the cut
The Kansas Experiment—a cautionary example
1) Kansas eliminated income tax on “pass-through” business earnings.
2) Result: Employment and GDP growth lagged compared to similar states—one study found growth was about 7.8% lower, with 2.6% fewer jobs.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12799
Academic consensus and fiscal multipliers
1) Economic models show that government spending (e.g., infrastructure, social transfers) delivers far higher short‑term stimulus than tax cuts for the wealthy or corporations.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trickle-down-economics-and-broken-promises/
2) Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz and others have endorsed “trickle-up” strategies: broaden growth by boosting middle and lower incomes, rather than relying on wealth accumulating at the top.