New York's new mayor, Bill de Blasio, in his inaugural speech, denounced people "on the far right" who "continue to preach the virtue of trickle-down economics." According to Mayor de Blasio, "They believe that the way to move forward is to give more to the most fortunate, and that somehow the benefits will work their way down to everyone else."
If there is ever a contest for the biggest lie in politics, this one should be a top contender.
While there have been all too many lies told in politics, most have some little tiny fraction of truth in them, to make them seem plausible. But the "trickle-down" lie is 100 percent lie.
It should win the contest both because of its purity — no contaminating speck of truth — and because of how many people have repeated it over the years, without any evidence being asked for or given.
Years ago, this column challenged anybody to quote any economist outside of an insane asylum who had ever advocated this "trickle-down" theory. Some readers said that somebody said that somebody else had advocated a "trickle-down" policy. But they could never name that somebody else and quote them.
Mayor de Blasio is by no means the first politician to denounce this non-existent theory. Back in 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama attacked what he called "an economic philosophy" which "says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else."
Let's do something completely unexpected: Let's stop and think. Why would anyone advocate that we "give" something to A in hopes that it would trickle down to B? Why in the world would any sane person not give it to B and cut out the middleman? But all this is moot, because there was no trickle-down theory about giving something to anybody in the first place.
The "trickle-down" theory cannot be found in even the most voluminous scholarly studies of economic theories — including J.A. Schumpeter's monumental "History of Economic Analysis," more than a thousand pages long and printed in very small type.
The Trickle Down Theory evolved from what Reagan said in a speech about the effects of cutting taxes to the wealthy,which would be they would have more money to invest or just spend on consumer items,and the end result would be the money they spend would "trickle down" to the middle and lower classes by virtue of jobs or even government aid by virtue of more people working and paying taxes instead of not working and requiring tax money to live.
That evil bastard Poppy Bush refereed to it as "Voo Doo Economics".
I have a hard time believing Sowell doesn't know this.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Quote: Justme wrote in post #3 Reagan was right but the term he coined is being misused and misunderstood now.
PURPOSELY misused.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
RIGHT'S RIGHT 
Print view
Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:27 pm
reply
