What does supply side economics or trickle down economics say a government should do to gt a country out of a?

H G: What does supply side economics or trickle down economics say a government should do to gt a country out of a?
What does supply side economics or trickle down economics say a government should do to gt a country out of a recession besides just lower taxes across the board ?

Answers and Views:

Answer by clamdirt4
Some of that is spelling out the failure in a economy..not the cure..
..there’s also Voo-Doo economics..
I personally think the best economics is big business with bona-fide buisness structure..
Not the small buisness model of looking for a buck–
===
Recession is(in my opinion)..a depression in a humanitarian world..
===
Trickle Down..idealogies/ethics..might be more worthy than trickle down econmics.

Answer by DON
Is it really the job of the government in this country to control the economy? The government has no control of the private sector market and should stay out of it according to the US Constitution. Maybe if taxes were reduced/abolished and then people had more to spend, that might help the economy instead of the government providing bail-outs for corporations at the expense of “we the people”

If the government is spending too much then they should spend less, abolish all unconstitutional spending and see if that helps?

Answer by Big Dan
Lower taxes on Corporations would certainly help. Responsible, business friendly incentives would be another way to encourage big and small business to add jobs. Let’s be honest, trickle down economics is the only way that the majority of incomes are created. These jobs then encourge spending and that creates jobs for the the entrepreneur to add workers.

Society can only support so many professionals, government services, and military minds. It takes a healthy economy and generous spending habits to support these services. Over taxation will never help stimulate an economy, it will only exacerbate the the basic fundamentals that cause recession.

Answer by BeachBum
Well you already grasped the first part of trickle down economics…cutting taxes but, remember, the main focus of this theory is to cut taxes for the richer portion of society. The concept is this will result in corporations (larger businesses) having increased revenue; therefore, they will increase production… there’s your ‘supply side’ increase.

The problem with this that seems to repeat itself continously no matter how many times it has been tried, is larger corporations, when acquiring increased revenue, want to hang on to it. Why? Increased revenue = increased quarterly profits = increased stock value. Additionally, once you show a gain in profits, if this drops off the next quarter, the market sees this negatively and the stock goes down.

So, and many economists will tell you this: (I’ve read it repeatedly) in order to keep their profit percentage at the increased level due to reduced taxes, the corporations end up taking the money out of the country. This is done by investing overseas, building branches overseas or sometimes literally packing up and moving entirely overseas. You see, there is something not much of the public knows in this country about how our government actually gives corporations an incentive to leave the country: a US corporation moving out of the country does not have to pay any taxes until they become profitable again.

You see, it’s like a puzzle. Trickle down says cut taxes on the rich = increased revenue for larger corporations = increased stock price that will only hold temporarily = the corporation having to make creative adjustments to hold that new profit increase = moves portion of business out of country to acquire lower wage base = less overhead = maintains increased profit percentage.

The bottomline is, the money never tricles down our system. The idea, in theory, is that corporations will use the new monies saved from reduced taxes for increaing supply… which will require them to increase their labor force… but this never happens.