On the supply side
Political analysts and reporters keep talking about “trickle-up” and “trickle-down” economics. What do these terms mean? Personally, I’m interested only in “trickle to my pocket.” But as far as taxes are concerned, I pay what the government says to pay. They decide how to apply the money.
The current administration largely uses supply-side economics. In a phrase, money is applied to the top level of the economy, with the hope placed in the fairness of industry controllers that it will trickle down to the worker class.
Supply-side economics as an economic definition is a macroeconomic philosophy that holds that:
1. Lowering income taxes and capital gains tax rates will encourage the wealthy to invest in stock market companies. Wealthy would describe people in the higher tax brackets, who would benefit most from these tax breaks by gaining more disposable income.
2. These investments made by the wealthy (if they make the investments) will encourage businesses to expand and produce an increased supply of goods and services at lower prices.
3. That expansion in turn, will result in economic growth, increasing employment, disposable income for more workers, and demand for these goods.
Supply-siders feel that in a high tax rate environment, lowering taxes to the right level can raise revenue by causing faster economic growth.
This philosophy is also referred to as “trickle-down economics.”
· Proponents argue economic growth will flow downward from top to bottom, indirectly benefiting those workers who do not directly benefit from the tax changes.
· Opponents argue that “trickle-down” policies, if they work at all, provide a very slim benefit by the time they reach the worker, due to the benefits taken out at every level.
Advocates of the trickle-down effect believe that a free market, unrestrained by heavy taxation, regulation and other forms of government controls, will cause an increase in wealth for society as a whole, part of which will “trickle down” benefits from the wealthy to the worker class, increasing their standard of living.
Increasing taxes reduces trade between businesses and discourages investment like an international trade barrier or tariff, meant for that purpose.
Nixonomics
In 1971, Republican President Richard Nixon ended the the U.S. Gold standard, where the value of the U.S. dollar was pinned to the fixed value of gold. Almost immediately,commodity prices such as oil and gold, spiked up. Actually, the value of commodities remained constant while the dollar was devalued.
As a result, the stock market lost half of its value between the market peak of 1972 and its bottom in 1982, with investors seeking better returns in commodities and real estate.
Decreasing market investment caused companies to cut back, increasing unemployment. Unions influenced business owners to keep raising prices, fearing more wage hikes, causing inflation. Nixon refused to cut taxes since he said the incentive to invest in the market was zero. The result was a stagnant economy with high inflation, better known as stagflation.
Wage and price controls were put into effect, but interest rates were allowed to run free. The result was rapidly rising interest rates and tight credit. Inflation caused wage earners to creep into ever higher tax brackets, losing wage increases to taxes. The number of households able to afford mortgages diminished.
This was an example of supply-side economics gone bad. High taxes, high inflation and uncontrolled interest rates in a free market economy caused the economy to grind to a halt.
Reaganomics
Skip ahead to 1981 when Republican Ronald Reagan became President. Unemployment was at 7.5% and inflation was at 13.5%.
Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker squeezed inflation from the economic system, by raising the federal funds rate to 20%, forcing the prime interest rate up to 21.5%. This extremely tight monetary policy intentionally plunged the U.S. economy into a deep recession and wiped inflationary psychology and expectations out of the system.
Economist Robert Mundell convinced the President to reduce upper bracket and capital gains taxes to increase national output and tax revenue, and that would bring inflation under control.
The ensuing tax cuts, reducing taxes by $749 billion over five years, drew the country out of recession, and the tax receipt level quickly returned, then surpassed previous levels.
This was an example of supply-side and trickle-down economics that worked. After the economy was intentionally put into a coma, it was restored to health with lower unemployment levels and higher wages, as well as lower prices for consumers.
There are arguments whether the tax cuts actually paid for themselves in the Reagan era. Take away natural increases due to inflation, increased FICA taxes and corporate taxes, tax revenue in constant dollars decreased by $2.77 billion in that time period. And recouping $746 billion is not bad. But one thing is clear, that Reaganomics dramatically reversed the American economic decline of the 1970s.
Trickle-down supply-side economics is the model cherished by the Republican Party.
Shortcomings
The supply-side of the argument has its shortcomings. The conditions must be correct and the trickle-down stream must be entirely without blockages in order to work:
1. Taxes must be high enough that economic expansion is currently stifled.
2. The lowering of taxes must be noticeable enough to the wealthy that they will consider investing the extra money and not save it or spend it only on personal consumption.
3. The stock market must be attractive enough for the wealthy to consider investment there, as opposed to, for example, foreign investments, commodities (like oil), or real estate.
4. Stock market companies who receive the investment must, in turn, invest in expansion and increased employment, with the goal of increased production and lowering prices of their products.
5. The demand for the products must increase as production increases so the company still makes at least the same profit as before the expansion.
The economy must continue to expand, with people buying an increasing number of the lower cost product.
Supply-side economics proposes that production or supply is the key to economic prosperity and that consumption or demand is secondary.
In other words, supply will influence demand.
Bush-onomics
Skip ahead again to 2001, with our current President George W. Bush.
Bush inherited an unsteady economy from Democratic President Bill Clinton. Over the three quarters prior to March 31, 2001, the economy grew only at a 1.1% annualized rate. Much of this was credited to the bursting of the the dot-com bubble.
With threats of impending recession from Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, Bush argued with Congress for a $1.35 trillion tax cut over ten years to stimulate the economy and create jobs. It was approved.
The early 2000s recession (which was not technically a recession) following the 1990s boom was not as bad as was predicted, but was still characterized by outsourcing followed by large layoffs, and recovery without strong employment growth.
Despite the resultant effects of the 2001 9/11 attacks, President Bush managed to keep the country out of recession.
Large numbers of economists were against the tax cuts, saying they will fail as a stimulus and “will worsen the long-term budget outlook … [and] generate further inequalities in after-tax income.” The President claimed the tax cuts paid for themselves through economic growth, but it took them until FY2006 to surpass the 2000 level and will take until 2011 to recover all the funds advanced.
Economist Arthur Laffer stood alone in stating that the tax cuts were “what was right,” because after the 9/11 attacks and threats of recession, the President “needed to stimulate the economy and spend for defense.”
Side note: Even with the tendency of the business cycle to produce periodic recessions, under Bush’s administration the length of time between recessions has extended to a record-breaking 17 years of sustained growth, in employment, personal income and Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In addition, there were decreases in the government deficit for years 2005, 2006, and 2007. Deficits however, still add to the public debt.
The previous record between recessions was 11 years, 1958 – 1969.
The supply-side economics of the Bush administration shows that he acted prior to a recession taking hold.
1. Taxes were not stifling to business investors, even though the economy was struggling.
2. Tax cuts issued up to 2003 resulted in a 20% increase in income of the top 1% income households.
3. The stock market received a great deal of investment, rising nearly 32% from January 2001 (10,686) to October 2007 (14,093).
4. Production expanded, reducing unemployment from a high of 6.3% in 2003 to 4.4% in March 2007, with an average of 5.2%.
This was an example of supply-side and trickle-down economics that worked for seven years, prior to the ‘economic downturn.’ The President executed a preemptive strike and kept the nation out of recession for most of his two terms in office.
Recession of 2008
The economic downturn is a harsh reality of economic cycles. It is now up to our President elect to lead us back to prosperity.
This recession, started by the bursting of the U.S. housing bubble, leaves businesses with their expansions hanging like a stone around their necks with no customers and sharply reduced stock value.
But that is the subject of another post.
Writing is an art form that not everyone has, but you are a true writer. You appeal to modern readers with unique ideas and content.
This article is more than interesting. You have written this in such a unique way that I read it and stayed interested. I agree with the points in your material.
Your writing style is proof positive that a writer can clearly express his or her original thoughts without a lot of flashy content. This is smart, engaging and informative material.
Thank you for writing this informative article. You have made sense of this topic with your original and quality content. It’s smart, engaging and interesting. Articles like this are genuinely appreciated by people like me.
I usually have a hard time grasping informational articles, but yours is clear. I appreciate how you’ve given readers like me easy to read info.
I love reading new information on just about any topic, as long as the writing is interesting. This article is interesting. I like it. Many of the points mentioned here are valid and I concur.
I would be interested in other articles you have written. Your views in this content has sparked my curiosity and I think a lot like you. I will keep coming back for more great information.
Your passion for this topic really shines in this article. I truly appreciate you writing these as your insight has made me think a lot about this topic. Thank you!
Some of the points made by the writer are compelling. I agree with most of what the writer has said and the presentation is fabulous.
I homeschool my two teenagers and when I found this article I knew I had to make them read it. They did and we all really learned something from it. Thank you for helping us.
Dedication is a good trait for a writer to have. You have dedication to your content and the material you write. This information is written very well and I concur on many of your views.
Thank you for writing this article. Having read several articles on this subject, I think your ideas are quite simply the best I have seen.
I love reading new information on just about any topic, as long as the writing is interesting. This article is interesting. I like it. Many of the points mentioned here are valid and I concur.
You’ve done an excellent job getting your point across in this article. I am very impressed with the points you made here and how well they are presented. Thank you for writing interesting, helpful content.
Writing isn’t as easy as some people think. You have it all together in this article. Your points are well-defined, unique and persuasive. You’ve influenced my thoughts on this subject.
There are many aspects of this article on which I concur with you. You have generated synapses in my brain not used often. Thank you for getting my neurons jumping.
You’ve done an excellent job expressing your thoughts in this article. I concur with a lot of your thoughts and appreciate your vast knowledge and forward thinking. Thank you for sharing your ideas with us.
This kind of information usually bores me to tears, but you have managed to make it more appealing. This really a quite interesting subject. I think I want more information.
It takes a special person to write a great quality article and you are such a person. The points you make in this writing are well thought out and written.
This article is comprehensive in its data. I appreciate this having much information laid out in such a clear format. You have a knack for engaging and influencing your readers. Interesting content can be rare.
Reading this article gave me a whole new outlook on this topic. I enjoyed reading your article very much. I agree with some of your views shared so well here.
The points you have written here are very valid and I agree with much of this data. This is a very good article. Thank you.
Thanks a lot! I really enjoyed reading this. It makes me want to create my own blog.
stays on topic and states valid points. Thank you.
I am impressed with the effort you have so obviously put into this content. I am also impressed with your point of view on this topic, especially since you have made your points so clear.
You have actually created some excellent points here. I specifically appreciate the way you’ve been able to stick so much thought into a relatively short post (comparitively) which creates it an thoughtful publish on your subject. In my opinion, you’ve presented the topic in a quite thorough yet concise manner, that is genuinely useful when someone wants to get the facts without spending too a lot time searching the Internet and sifting out the noise to discover the answers to their questions. I usually get so frustrated with so numerous in the final results inside the major SE’s due to the fact they normally seem to mostly be filled with filler content that often isn’t extremely sensible. If you don’t mind I’m going to add this post and your blog to my delicious favorites so I can share it with my family. I appear forward to coming back to read your future posts as well.
I read so many poorly written articles with dull content on this topic that I was pleasantly surprised by yours. It’s great to know there’s at least one writer that writes interesting and unique material.
I enjoyed your informative article. You were able to keep my interest through out with your attention-getting content. I really do appreciate your hard work.
I have honestly never read such overwhelmingly good content like this. I agree with your points and your ideas. This info is really great. Thanks.
This article is really good. I’ve enjoyed reading the original content and fresh ideas you wrote. You are good at writing on this topic and I hope I can read more of your work soon.
It’s not typical for me to read this kind of informational article but yours caught my attention as soon as I started reading it. This is useful and interesting information.
I think that informational articles should be more like yours. By that I mean they should have character. Your article had character and is persuasive. Your views are very interesting.
One thing is for sure. You did a lot of research on this. It’s either that or you just have the knowledge. This is impressive.
Great article! I really enjoyed the reading. I am hoping to read more from you. I think you have great insight and vision. I am highly impressed with this information.
Thank you for this appealing and quality content. This very informative and interesting content with many eye-opening points. I concur with much of this content and appreciate the writer’s perceptions.
My favorite past-time is reading informative articles. Your article is one of the most interesting I’ve read. Your insightful, fresh views gave me many things to think about. Thank you.
I was in a rush when I first read your article, so I came back to read it again. Thank you for this great information.
It’s become somewhat an oddity to find superior article content these days. I was pleasantly surprised to find this well written article. There are many logical points made that made me reflect on this topic.
I read a lot of online articles that are all over the place, confusing, off topic and boring, but not yours. Yours is right on topic and it stays there.
This type of content is interesting to me but your’s is so different. The amount of detail and work that I see in this article is impressive. I really like your take on this topic.