05-15-2011, 02:03 PM
Ca Bob wrote:
The results of this historical experiment are unambiguous. As one conservative commentator recently pointed out, the supply side ideology has been shown to be wrong by 30 years' experience. Yet for some reason, Republican leaders continue to make the erroneous argument (see M Bachmann) that tax cuts should not be counted as part of a deficit reduction program.
I just pulled this paragraph out to quote because it sort of represents a summary of the excellent points you made throughout your post. I had asked for empirical evidence for trickle down (supply side) in the OP. Grace62 was good enough to provide a link to an economist who made an argument for it. But, as near as I can tell, what the argument amounts to is a theoretic one - theoretically, over the long term cutting taxes on wealthy people brings in more revenue than the taxes "cost" in temporary revenue reduction. I didn't see a thorough-going analysis of empirical evidence, though, for that theory. As you say, it sure seems as if the empirical evidence of the last few decades points to the opposite conclusion.
It's interesting that Grace62 was the only one to even try to provide an argument for supply side economics (well, she provided a link to such an argument). I'm sure that there must be conservative posters here who believe that supply side works, so why haven't they pitched in with an argument for it? The petty side of me suspects it is because those posters just take supply side as an article of faith because it fits with the world view they prefer. The less petty side of me just wonders why believers in supply side economics haven't tried to make the case for it with empirical evidence. Is it because there really isn't any (or it's weak and fragmentary)?
Thanks very much for your contribution to this thread. It was a really good read.