4 ms·

TLDR > The trickle-down theory is all but dead, but there is more to the supply side of the economy than taxes. Thousands of government decisions affect real o

TLDR > The trickle-down theory is all but dead, but there is more to the supply side of the economy than taxes. Thousands of government decisions affect real output and economic productivity. A new supply-side economics would recognize that productivity growth is the right target, but it would reject tax policy as the primary means of stimulating productivity. Instead, it would examine how everything government does — from permitting to procurement — could be improved to increase productivity. Which is basically saying that lowering taxes is not the only way to achieve trickle-down. The rest of the article is stating the obvious fact that the poor spend a higher proportion of their income on things that are essential - and it's possible to make those cheaper. But the criticism of tickle-down was never that it targeted the wrong services (e.g. entertainment instead of housing). The main criticism is that it increases inequality.

bluecalm 6y ago
While the fact that making things cheaper improves the situation e for everyone, especially the poor/struggling people is obvious to you or me it's far for obvious to most people and is absent from the public debate. Every progressive politician beats the drum of more taxes, more money for healthcare (and other stuff) and things magically improve. When was the last time a major politician said something a long the lines of: "let's think how to make doctor visits cheaper so people don't avoid them, maybe you know, lower requirements, allow nurses and other healthcare workers to carry simple checkups or minor treatments". Making stuff cheaper if what worked historically to improve the economic situation of poor/lower economic classes. It should be the main focus but it somehow isn't.
- ModernMech 6y ago
  This is a premature optimization. Making things cheaper isn't the solution when there's a giant, engorged parasite sitting in the middle of the system sucking up all the slack. As soon as you make things cheaper, the parasite will just gobble up all your savings. Get rid of the parasite first.
  - bluecalm 6y ago
    I agree it's a parasite. I don't agree that what the parasite takes from the system is that much. You will need state run bureaucracy with single payer. It will cost a lot of money. Maybe less than the current parasite but I don't think the numbers ate there to claim it's the biggest problem of the system.
    - ModernMech 6y ago
      There's a difference between a bureaucracy and a parasite. A bureaucracy is part of the necessary complexity of a healthcare system. What's not necessary is a profit motive. I would say it doesn't matter whether or not insurance is the biggest problem of the system, it is a problem because its purpose to to extract profit from any available nook and crevice. Profit motives elsewhere in the system are also a problem.
- villasv 6y ago
  > making things cheaper improves the situation for everyone, especially the poor [...] is absent from the public debate. > When was the last time a major politician said something a long the lines of I can only answer considering Brazil, my home country. Despite the mess that we're currently in, even we have these points in the public debate. Fixing the income tax progression to rebalance the tax burden, reducing tax on goods and compensating on services, prioritizing investments on public services essential but currently too expensive for the poor (e.g. infant day care). More often we discuss that taxes are not following the "principle of contributive capacity" than we discuss increasing taxes (except for stock dividends and other super-rich stuff, which are also always mentioned). I won't say that we're having significant progress, as there are always some profiting from the current state of affairs to block the road, but if you pay attention to the right politicians, those topics pop up constantly.

bluecalm 6y ago

While the fact that making things cheaper improves the situation e for everyone, especially the poor/struggling people is obvious to you or me it's far for obvious to most people and is absent from the public debate. Every progressive politician beats the drum of more taxes, more money for healthcare (and other stuff) and things magically improve. When was the last time a major politician said something a long the lines of: "let's think how to make doctor visits cheaper so people don't avoid them, maybe you know, lower requirements, allow nurses and other healthcare workers to carry simple checkups or minor treatments". Making stuff cheaper if what worked historically to improve the economic situation of poor/lower economic classes. It should be the main focus but it somehow isn't.

ModernMech 6y ago
This is a premature optimization. Making things cheaper isn't the solution when there's a giant, engorged parasite sitting in the middle of the system sucking up all the slack. As soon as you make things cheaper, the parasite will just gobble up all your savings. Get rid of the parasite first.
- bluecalm 6y ago
  I agree it's a parasite. I don't agree that what the parasite takes from the system is that much. You will need state run bureaucracy with single payer. It will cost a lot of money. Maybe less than the current parasite but I don't think the numbers ate there to claim it's the biggest problem of the system.
  - ModernMech 6y ago
    There's a difference between a bureaucracy and a parasite. A bureaucracy is part of the necessary complexity of a healthcare system. What's not necessary is a profit motive. I would say it doesn't matter whether or not insurance is the biggest problem of the system, it is a problem because its purpose to to extract profit from any available nook and crevice. Profit motives elsewhere in the system are also a problem.
villasv 6y ago
> making things cheaper improves the situation for everyone, especially the poor [...] is absent from the public debate. > When was the last time a major politician said something a long the lines of I can only answer considering Brazil, my home country. Despite the mess that we're currently in, even we have these points in the public debate. Fixing the income tax progression to rebalance the tax burden, reducing tax on goods and compensating on services, prioritizing investments on public services essential but currently too expensive for the poor (e.g. infant day care). More often we discuss that taxes are not following the "principle of contributive capacity" than we discuss increasing taxes (except for stock dividends and other super-rich stuff, which are also always mentioned). I won't say that we're having significant progress, as there are always some profiting from the current state of affairs to block the road, but if you pay attention to the right politicians, those topics pop up constantly.