I can't speak for the "wealthy elite" you libs rail about, but the tax cuts are working fine for me. I like spending my own money, not letting the politicians spend more than they already do.The sum and total of the Republican platform these days is MORE TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH! After all, they have to pay back those people who contribute to their campaign coffers. But here’s what those tax cuts for the wealthy elite actually do :
-Spike the annual deficit and the long-term debt (that’s shat happened after every one of those tax cuts)
-Increase the economic inequality between the wealthy elite and the rest of us
You don’t have to believe me:
“The results suggest that tax reforms do not lead to higher economic growth. The effect size of major tax cuts for the rich on real GDP per capita is close to zero and statistically insignificant. Major tax cuts for the rich do not lead to higher growth in either the short or medium run.”
The economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich
Abstract . The last 50 years has seen a dramatic decline in taxes on the rich across the advanced democracies. There is still fervent debate in both political aacademic.oup.com
One of the reasons that the right wing economic propagandists give for the tax cuts for the rich is that it “frees up in estment money”. Actually, there was no need to do this. There has been plenty of investment money available since at least the mid-90s (except, of course, during the Great Recession), and what it actually does is to result in TOO MUCH investment money so that it goes looking for risky investments such as mortgage derivatives, or hedge funds that buy up perfectly good companies, fire a bunch of employees, sell off assets, and leave ruin and unemployment in its wake.
Know how to increase investment money? Give tax cuts to the masses. They will then use that money to invest in PRODUCTS, and those companies can then use their profits to increase infrastructure and employment.
In fact, every single one of those tax cuts should have been given TOTALLY to the masses. We have seen time and again that trickle-down doesn’t work, but we know that trickle up does. If people have money, they are going to spend it.
Hardly libertarian. However, you parrot the liberal blah, blah, blah. You aren't well educated, are you?
So what?
Would you please also graph revenue over that time span for us?
...the utter absurdity of this comment is just breathtaking.
Words of ignorance that ONLY come from folk who do not value American-styled democracy (much less "individual liberty").
IGNORANT COMMENT.
TLDR.
First, you haven't (and you will not) "refute" sh!t, my friend. You can't "refute" anything simply by saying "I refute!". This is not Congress and you do not have a "veto". That's not how INTELLIGENT people engage in debate. You refute by presenting an opposing arguments, facts, stats, research,, data, etc. etc. No one gives a rat's butt's worth of credibility to your baseless, fact-free, FEELINGS and utterly ignorant OPINIONS, @NatMorton.
Next...."so what"?? What kind of dumb-arsed argument is that? So what if tax cuts for the wealthy are destructive to the economy and the prosperity of the entire middle class in that economy? So what????
That's just MORONICALLY stupid of you to admit. But, at the same time, it's also a rare moment of unvarnished HONESTY from pseudo-intellectuals who pretend to be "fiscal conservatives".
The entire Supply-Side Economic Experiment is a well-documented, thoroughly proven FAILURE. There are, at this point, virtually no credible economists still arguing on behalf of it's "trickle-down" theories. That debate, to whatever degree it ever existed as an honest, intellectual question......is over.
Study after Study after Study after Study.....has PROVEN, beyond any doubt, that tax cuts (especially the high-income and corporate variety) are LITERALLY the WORST FORM of economic stimulus there is. That is a FACT:
----------------------
------------
So again, the debate about Supply-Side/Reaganomics and Tax Cuts as economic stimulus is OVER.
It was always based upon a lie. Tax Cuts do NOT "pay for themselves" and are the WORST form fiscal stimulus there is. In FACT, most forms of tax cuts are COUNTERPRODUCTIVE to a recovering economy.
Words of ignorance that ONLY come from folk who do not value American-styled democracy (much less "individual liberty").
IGNORANT COMMENT.
Period.
No thanks. I like this one.
Since you have nothing to add, you are dismissed.
....(Too Lazy, Didn't Read), he says. Too LAZY to read it, huh? 
"Sure thing. Provided the government is funded sufficiently to perform the roles it must do, then there is absolutely no harm that comes from some citizens growing very wealthy and much more wealthy than others. In fact, it's probably a sign of a very healthy economy."
www.marketwatch.com
“Governments shouldn’t be worried that raising taxes on the rich will harm their economies when deciding on how to pay for COVID-19. Our new research on 18 advanced economies shows that major tax cuts for the rich over the past 50 years have pushed up inequality but have had no significant effects on economic growth or unemployment.
The data suggests that low taxes on the rich bring economies little benefit. This suggests there is a strong economic case for raising taxes on the rich to help repair public finances following the pandemic.
Our recent research shows that the economic case for low taxes on the rich is weak. Major tax cuts for the rich since the 1980s have worsened income inequality without boosting economic performance.”
Here's proof that tax cuts for the rich don't boost the economy
GDP per capita and unemployment rates are nearly identical after five years in countries that cut taxes on the rich and in those that did not.
Just as I said.
