Comments by "Greg Greg" (@SlowhandGreg) on "Cost-of-living crisis: 'The more Government helps, the worse things could get' says Alex Phillips" video.

  1. We have eye watering levels of personal taxation due to Thatcherism = Supply Side Economics We have private utilities we have no control over because Thatcherism We have no control over our North Sea deposits because Thatcherism Osborne Sunak same old failed policies recycled Thatcher got away with it by bribing people with Oil tax money and a one off sale of Britain's assets its a total failure since Supply-side economics assumes that lower tax rates boost economic growth by giving people incentives to work, save, and invest more. A critical tenet of this theory is that giving tax cuts to high-income people produces greater economic benefits than giving tax cuts to lower-income folks. Essentially, the more money the rich are able to keep, the more the whole economy will grow. But the evidence reveals two fundamental problems with this story. First, its primary prediction is wrong—giving tax cuts to the rich does not increase economic output or create new jobs. Instead, tax cuts for middle- and low-income taxpayers are much more effective at boosting macroeconomic activity. Second, supply-side theory misunderstands the actual mechanism by which tax rates influence macroeconomic activity. While supply-siders maintain that lower rates at the top incentivize people to earn more money, the evidence shows that tax cuts boost output mostly by putting money in people’s pockets and thereby stimulating demand. Why is supply-side economics controversial? Opponents of supply-side economics argue that rather than increasing revenue for the government, lowering taxes will instead increase the deficit. As a result, the government will have to cut programs or raise other taxes to make up for this shortfall, unless it wishes to run a permanent deficit.
    1