That being said. The UBTI is the best way to even the playing field. We can no longer rely solely on markets to lift all boats. Trickle down is a failed theory and we need to acknowledge this. I don’t believe $500 will do anythingNo drastic action is needed or we are headed toward a fiscal disaster long term. High Stock markets or not. to improve the fates of the working classes if all other aid is destroyed which is what the GOP will ask for. We have to set a bar and then tax accordingly. I always laugh when the people who would benefit most from this play the fiscal conservative and work against their own interests. Which is why they are poor or barely getting by. No drastic action is needed or we are headed toward a fiscal disaster long term. High Stock markets or not.

I’m struggling to make sense of this paragraph. Help me out.

The UBTI is the best way to even the playing field.

Well, that’s one man’s opinion. There exist others, especially from those who recognize that the free market has delivered prosperity to this country on cue for 250 years, and who also believe that a few tweaks to some really, really, REALLY bad policies could return the free market to its previous place as the deliverer of wealth across all income brackets.

Trickle down is a failed theory and we need to acknowledge this.

Except when it works. “Trickle Down” (which needs to be defined each time it’s used, since the term has no meaning in economics) apparently here is being used to refer to lowering tax rates on the rich in order to deliver higher levels of prosperity to the poor.

Conceptually, it’s correct to say that lowering tax rates on the rich does not deliver higher levels of prosperity to the poor. It’s ALSO correct to say that HIGH tax rates does not deliver higher levels of prosperity to the poor. To wit:

Image for post
Image for post

As you can see, the GINI ratio has increased on the same slope rate from the late 1960’s to date. Let’;s discuss what that DOESN’T mean:

  1. Whatever Reagan did didn’t change the trend towards greater income inequality.
  2. More broadly, the tax code doesn’t have anything to do with income inequality at all.
  3. Interestingly, that JUMP in inequalty happened at the same time that Bush and Clinton were raising taxes.

My conclusion from that is that if you believe that the tax code is the cause of inequality, OR that you can use the tax code to SOLVE inequality, you’re smoking too much of what is legal in Colorado.

I always laugh when the people who would benefit most from this play the fiscal conservative and work against their own interests.

Hm. Let;s keep in mind here that living in nation of people that is so selfish as to only work for their own interests would not be a pleasant place to live.

Conservatives would all agree that we don;t vote out own best interests. We vote our CHILDREN’S best interests, because we tend not to be selfish navel-gazers.

Which is why they are poor or barely getting by.

I don;t know where this comment comes from. I church (well, mosque) and work with people in the upper middle class and better, Most are conservative. If any of us are “:not getting by” it’s because we were stupid enough to buy a third Mercedes. Which is not the fault of anyone other than ourselves.

No drastic action is needed or we are headed toward a fiscal disaster long term. High Stock markets or not.

Dude. If you can see into the future, then make your gift useful and tell us the prices of IBM, XOM, and WMT in 2020. So we can all make a few bucks on the “disaster”.

Written by

Data Driven Econophile. Muslim, USA born. Been “woke” 2x: 1st, when I realized the world isn’t fair; 2nd, when I realized the “woke” people are full of shit.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store