ShareThis Page

Reject 'trickle-down' myth

| Friday, Nov. 10, 2017, 8:57 p.m.

In 2013, Republican Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback set out to prove that tax cuts grow the economy, bring back jobs and make everyone richer. In what was described by a New York Times writer as a “petri dish for movement conservatism,” he cut personal income tax and imposed no tax on business incomes. Brownback told The Wall Street Journal, “My focus is to create a red state model that allows Republicans to say, ‘See we've got a better way and it works.'”

None of his claims about tax cuts came to be. In fact they did exactly the opposite. This year, the Republican Kansas Legislature overrode Brownback's veto and repealed his signature tax cuts.

The Trump tax plan currently being discussed is based on this “petri dish” experiment. We know how this ends. The wealthy continue to get wealthier and the rest of us continue to lose ground.

It is time to reject this trickle-down concept. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Brownback has proven that tax cuts for the wealthy and for businesses do not grow the economy, nor do they increase our wealth.

It is time we make decisions based on the facts. Research the Kansas experiment and then let your congressman and senator know that you are done losing ground while the wealthy get richer. Reject this “trickle-down” myth.

Renalda Arndt

South Huntingdon

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.