The producers have been doing exceptionally well. The workers have not. And I just don't see investing further in the wealthy, when the wealthy, are the wealthiest, or perhaps wealthier, than the Robber Barons of the 1890's, to 1920's.
Trickle Down Economics only works, if the wealth does in fact trickle down. If the wealth consolidates, the whole economic theory fails.
Wealthy countries, are not measured by how wealthy, their wealthiest 1 in 1000 citizens is. They're measured by how wealthy, and the high standard of living, their population as a whole is. Right now it appears our population is slowly but surely falling into poverty.
And that's what's been happening over the past 40 years. Reagan came in, he said, if we give these huge tax cuts to the wealthy, they will in turn, use them to help the lower and middle class. If there was evidence of that happening, at minimum the wealth distribution would have stayed the same as it was in 1977, as it is today in 2017.
To borrow a quote from a scholar's paper on wealth inequality in America:
"Americans today live in a starkly unequal society. Inequality is greater now than it has been at any time in the last century, and the gaps in wages, income, and wealth are wider here than they are in any other democratic and developed economy."
http://scalar.usc.edu/works/growing-...equality/index
Also purely from a budgetary standpoint, tax cuts for the wealthy, have wreaked havoc on our nations fiscal situation. In 1945, the debt to GDP ratio, was around 120% or so GDP. By 1981, the debt to GDP was 32% or so. We basically paid off the entire WWII debt.
Today, the debt, again is around over 100% of GDP. What happened? We use to balance the budget almost annually between 1945-1981. Now we annually run up a debt. We have only balanced the budget 4 times in the last 36 years (1997-2000).
I've always said, that tax cuts should never be financed with borrowed money from China and Japan. Because if you have to borrow the money to pay for the tax cut, at face value, it appears you're weakening the United States, and strengthening China and Japan.
Unfortunately I can rarely get a supply sider to agree with me on that statement, they firmly believe in tax cuts, even if you have to borrow money for the next 32 out 36 years (1981-2017) to finance the tax cuts. It just seems like when it comes to balancing the budget, and paying down the debt, the supply-sider always, eternally, puts that on the back burner of his priorities.
