There are supply side policy arguments that make sense.

But that's separate from the linked article, which was a discussion of an empirical paper that claims to find evidence that "tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich"

A good faith way of addressing the argument would have been to look at examples where evidence appears to contradict this, or potential flaws in the academic paper, rather than dismiss the idea that supply siders believe that tax cuts for the wealthy benefit more than just the rich based on a label used in a blog headline...

(GP, in this context, refers to the "grandparent" comment upthread)

▲

manlymuppet 8 hours ago | parent [-]

My problem is not the article saying that tax cuts for the wealthy are bad. Although this moves us into normative territory, I'd actually personally agree that tax cuts for the wealthy are not we need.

But my problem is that "take from the poor and indiscriminately give to the rich" is a mischaracterization of supply-side economics.

	▲	card_zero 7 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If "take from the poor and give to the rich" means just don't tax the rich so much, that's a mischaracterization of taking and giving.
	▲	smallmancontrov 8 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It mischaracterizes the mask but accurately describes the face beneath it.