I don't think it's possible to prove just yet, we will know how it affected things a year or two.
The important question is how are we going to use the new income we collect from the rich......So far all we have is hire unneeded public union workers that we don't want. Gotta pay back those lobbies...... So far in the last three weeks Obama has fucked up immigration even more, went out publicly trying to funnel money into unions, and covered up a serious crime against humanity. He keeps this shit up, this is going to be a landslide election.
You mad bro? What I said is true.......Even I am surprised of how Obama is fucking up on a roll, he's a smart guy making some very bad decisions. The thing is, I am not a Romney fan you fail to comprehend that, but I can't tell the difference between him and Obama. I am not blinded by red or blue, I make my decision on logic and right and wrong. So far this election has been Obama's to fuck up, I am just surprised as you, the outstanding job he's doing. You have no credibility you cannot tell right and wrong, just democrat or republican you seem to justify anything because Bush was an idiot.
"My god ... it's full of stars!" - David Bowman neerGreen 2: Soilless grow
"But one thing gives hope – the visible swing in public opinion...In that spectacular disaster the working class, the middle class and even a section of the business community could see the utter rottenness of private capitalism." ~George Orwell
"To understand trickle-down theory, we have to iterate some economic basics. First off, all capitalistic economies undergo natural ups and downs. In times of prosperity, economic activity is high, and jobs are easy to find. In times of recession, a country's economy produces less, and people have trouble finding jobs. Government steps in to try to help smooth out these fluctuations and dull the pain of sharp economic downturns.
Adjusting the tax policy is one way to affect the economy, and the U.S. government has been using tax policy this way almost since the inception of the national income tax in 1913. Although economists agree that changing how a government taxes its citizens can have some dramatic effects on an economy, they disagree on which policy is best. Trickle-down theory represents one such idea that can supposedly spur economic growth.
*In a nu*tshell, trickle-down theory is based on the premise that within an economy, giving tax breaks to the top earners makes them more likely to earn more. Top earners invest that extra money in productive economic activities or spend more of their time at the high-paying trade they do best (whether that be creating inventions or performing heart surgeries). Either way, these activities will be productive, reinvigorate economic growth and, in the end, generate more tax revenue from these earners and the people they've helped. According to the theory, this boost in growth will ultimately help those in lower income brackets as well. Although trickle-down economics is often associated with the policies of Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, the theory dates back to the 1920s. The name also has roots in the '20s, when humorist Will Rogers coined the term, saying, "The money was all appropriated for the top in the hopes it would trickle down to the needy"
Basically, trickle down is a method used to put more money in the hands of capitalists on the theory that they will put it to productive use. That productive use will spur the economy, increase hiring and the fruits of the increased productivity will lift everybody's net worth.
It worked post Kennedy. It worked post Reagan. Will it continue to work? I don't know, the world is a different place than it was in Kennedy's time. It seems to me the biggest head wind the US faces is the economic recovery of Europe post WWII and the rise of the Asian countries as competitors in the economic sphere. After WWII the US was more or less the only economy left standing and the US had beefed up industrial capacity for the war effort. Economically, the world was our oyster from 1945 to about 1975.
Bookmarks