People are easily fooled; trickle-down is really trickle-up.

It is basically a crock of crap. The rich didn't rich by giving their money away.

I think "trickle down theory" is the biggest, and mo successful, "con job" ever played. After over 25 years, it is obvious that it hasn't worked out as they said it would, and yet people still believe it to be true.

First of all, the rich did not get rich by being benevolent. Giving them more will not mean they will decide to give more to those who labor in order to support their lifestyles. Giving them more provides no real incentive to do so. If i own a business and get a large tax break, but demand for my goods and services remain the same, i have no incentive to hire any new people. I just hve more money and thus more power because I have more money.

The really insidious part of the con is the idea that taxes have been cut. The rich pay less, but in order to make up for lost revenues, the federal government cuts funds that go to state and local governments. They in turn raise taxes and fee3s, which are paid for by the working poor and middle class. A tax cut for the rich is nto so much a tax cut as it is a transfer of the tax burden. You pay higher sales taxes, higher DMV fees, higher parking frees and higher fines for parking and moving violations, higher fees for licenses and IDs, taxes on untilties and utility fees also get increased. This is in par why your cell phone taxes are so high.

In addition, to increasing taxes on those who are nhto rich, they also reduce government services, maintenance on government lands and buildings and infrastructure maintenance. This is why they (Trump's people) want to raise the fees to visit poorly maintain national parks to as much as $75 per car.

Most peopel are aware that the most prosperous period int he U.S. with the largest increase in gross domestic product (GDP) and hte largest increase in the standard of living, was from teh end of World War II, through the early 1960's. The top tax rate during that period for the people in the very top tax bracket was 91%. Obviously high taxes on the rich didn't hurt the economy one bit.

The reason why the progressive tax system worked so well with a top rate of 91%, was that people only had to pay that tax if they took money out of their businesses and moved into their own personal wealth. They could avoid the high tax by reinvesting the money back into their businesses, which is what most people in that tax bracket did. They had incentive to grow their businesses and hire new people in order to avoid paying the higher taxes. That is the tneire purpose of the graduated progressive tax system, where the more money you make, in personal income, the higher you can be taxed. This tax system was proposed by Adam Smith in his book "The Wealth of Nations", in 1776, and ws the architecture of economic policy adopted by Alexander Hamilton, which was mostly followed, in the U.S. all the way up until Ronald Reagan flipped economics on its head, with "Supply Side Economics" out of which sprung, "Trickle Down Theory."

trickle down only works if someone is into Golden Showers

pure hogwash peddled by the culture of greed and its supporters. ANY politician peddling that tripe has little character and it not to be trusted.

"Either it's a religious belief, a belief where no amount of evidence would change that, or they are using the argument cynically and they just want more money for themselves." Joseph E. Stiglitz, noble laureate in economics on the current Republican tax 'reform' and trickle down economics in general.

I agree. The term "trickle down" can only delude the willfully ignorant. It's like they've never seen water trickle, or something. I mean, there ain't much water if it's a trickle.

It makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.

It's impossible for either trickle down or trickle up not to work.
Trickle up shouldn't need any explanation. Poor people buy something from companies, services of those more well to do and the benefit goes up in both profits and the need to hire more people to deliver/produce the goods/services.
Trickle down works because the only thing the wealthy can do with money if they don't bury it or hide it in a mattress is help those below them.
Either they spend it creating jobs, reducing the number of those looking for work and putting more money into the economy buying more stuff, thus putting upward pressure on wages.
Or, they invest in in companies allowing the companies to expand creating more jobs, reducing more the available labor, again putting upward pressure on the cost of labor and more money into the economy from those newly hired.
Or, they save it making money available to those who will borrow and spend it creating jobs or borrow it to enlarge their company, again taking people out of the labor force which also puts upward pressure on wages while creating demand for more goods and services which creates even more jobs.

I think its b.s. it hasnt worked before because the rich people don't put the money back into the economy the way a poorer person would. A poorer person will spend the money on things they need, and the rich would just put it in their Swiss bank accounts.