Since the US has transitioned to a demand based economy things have seemed to get exponentially worse particularly for the ever shrinking middle class. To sum up what demand side economics is, at the core it is intended to grow devolved economies with consumer demand (spending) as the vehicle to make that happen. It seeks to grow the money supply in order to distribute wealth so consumer demand can continue to rise. Increases government spending to help stimulate the economy and stabilize its growth. The pitfalls are obvious (hopefully) an ever growing battle with inflation and costs that continue to rise on a long term basis. Wealth distribution increases as the consumers by design keep on consuming (giving their money to the same people) which eventually leads to a shrinking of the middle class. It discourages saving and encourages spending. It’s no secret that the US economy has largely been kept afloat by consumer spending. Supply side economics know to Americans as “trickle down economics”, a term coined in the 80’s to discredit the theory and propagandize public sentiment negatively. Isn’t necessarily the opposite of demand side economics but a different link of the same chain. At its core it seeks to grow the economy by increasing the production of goods and refining natural resources to then sell internationally and amongst themselves. On the policy side it utilizes the laffer curve, which effectively can be summed up by finding the amount of taxation that doesn’t discourage economic activity but still allows for essential services to be provided and minimize the amount of debt incurred (finding the happy spot of taxation revenue) saying that a 0% tax rate brings in the same amount of revenue as a 100% tax rate, 0. It seeks to lower taxes and reduce government spending and increasing incentives for business and the public.
increase taxes cuz most rich people are annoying cunts imo
>>61195802Supply Side economics was right all along.We don't need to print endless dollars to stimulate the economy and make the rich richer.The anti-supply side meme was a fucking psyop
>>61195802Nice GPT post loser. When the boomers die, taxes are going up. We tried low taxes and got a fake and gay NFT/OnlyFans/Grifter economy. China’s economy represents their ability to actually make stuff.>b-b-but if you tax us we’ll leave Good. Also doubt it. Where are you going to go? Putin farms oligarchs for his own wealth, Xi re-educates them for trying the shit the wealthy do here, the wealthy loathe Europe’s regulations and taxes. Africa? South America? SEA? Lmaoo
>>61195867>We tried low taxes and got a fake and gay NFT/OnlyFans/Grifter economy.yeah lmfao that was a result of "low taxes"(effective taxes on the rich are almost the SAME as the 1950s)and not the endless money printing you fucking retards support
>>61195802We just need a net worth tax. I would exclude primary residence up to 1 million and retirement accounts from the tax. It would also be a progressive tax rate. Once the net worth crosses 10 billion or so it would be almost impossible to grow your wealth anymore because the tax on that would be 5% or so maybe. I'm not exactly sure what the numbers would be but I would want enough money to balance the budget and pay for everyone's healthcare and have a healthcare system that has more facilities and workers than necessary so we would have idle doctors waiting for patients instead of patients waiting for doctors.
>>61195802>Supply Side VS Demand Side EconomicsDoesn't even work when all money is debt created as debt by bankers. >i.e. bankers give you a mortgage>and create money out of nothing >if you model economics based on banks creating money out of nothing as credit>you will get actual working models>that can predict stuff
>>61195926Wealth taxes and very high taxes in general don't work because the wealthy just leave the country or renounce citizenship. Pissing off billionaires, millionaires and highly productive people by taking their money is a great way to destroy your economy ackshually.
>>61195926>net worth taxAre you going to tax corporate net worth the same way, or will you just rig the game for blackrock to buy assets cheaply from the few remaining free individual entrepreneurs left in the system?
>>61196046>Doesn't even work when all money is debt created as debt by bankers.Well that is not the case some money is debt but not all.
>>61196110This.https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/eu/wealth-tax-impact/
