It's not about rich person consumption, it's about rich person investment. Poor people are not going to invest in capital, only someone with lots of cash looking to make more cash does that. The proof is easy, compare economies where capital investment is directed by government versus investment by individuals. It's a no brainer, a million individuals looking to make a buck beats a government bureaucracy every time. That's not even a point of debate, it's a no brainer. If it were not true, then communism would have triumphed. The fact is whenever economic growth is desired, taxes are cut, that's the first thing 'enterprise zones' do. Government is notoriusly poor at business decisions, they are a bureaucracy that is motivated by politics and critical decisions are made by a few people. Market economies on the other hand have the collective wisdom of millions and by Darwinian trial and error some real gems pop up. It's messy but far better than government where only one idea gets developed. Poeple like to point out the internet as a government success. The fact is is wasn't made for economic reasons but for military reasons and the government geniuses saw no value in it initially. Only later when some motivated individuals saw potential did it take off. Micheal Dell moved from Austin to Round Rock for tax reasons, the geniuses in Austin saw no reason to give him the tax breaks being offered to other entities, or they were motivated by political preference. The point is they saw no value in his enterprise. The 90% tax rates were not the total effective rate in the 60s, and the public education system is very inefficient and fails in critical areas, I would hardly hold it up as successful.
Thanks for repeating republican viewpoints. And you addressed absolutely nothing from what I said about investment. Public education not successful? How about 99% literacy rate? You think it could have been done with private education? Not a chance. Public education is an unqualified success. Just because some inner city school in the most depressed economic part of a city is not a feeder for harvard does not mean the idea is bad. I reiterate my point: public spending is not necessarily inferior to private spending. Spending on science, education, infrastrucutre>spending on hotels, yachts, whores and strippers.
Just because a 17 year old can read Dr. Suess does not mean a good education, and if it is such a smashing success then tell me why is there so much holler from the left for more spending on education? Why was there even a no child left behind act if it was so good? Everyone with a critical mind knows that public schools are shitty. You got your response addressing public versus private investment, whether it comes from republicans or not doesn't matter, it's still true. Communism would have worked if you were right and your strawman examples of yacht spending are kind of pathetic.
No, not everyone "knows" public schools are shitty. It depends on what public school you take. The school I went to owns every private school in that city. It was AP/IB magnet school that "fed" people into Ivies/MIT on a regular basis. You are disputing things which are indisputable, which any sane person would acknowledge. The benefits of having 99% literacy (as opposed to 20%) are overwhelming. The reason the left cares about education is because if it did not some people would fall through the cracks and not have a fair shot at life. Communism failed for great many reasons, but in large part because it denied private property and because it tried to manage the whole economy itself. Governments are uniquely suited to do things for public benefit such as carrying out things for public benefit. Without FDA, CDC, we could all be owned by a rogue virus. There is very little benefit to the country from discretionary spending i mentioned. Spending on infrastructure, education, etc. benefits everyone. The Interstate highway system is one of the things that makes US great. Btw, it is kind of silly to trumpet the absolute superiority of the private sector right now considering that "expertly managed" enterprises in the financial sector and automotive sectors are facing oblivion. That is capitalism at its best.
Exactly. Public spending on: 1) Police 2) Firefighters 3) Court system 4) Jail system 5) Roads and freeways 6) Border Patrol 7) Military 8) Oversight and enforcement on health issues (e.g. CDC, etc) 9) Oversight and enforcement on interstate commerce 10) Oversight and enforcement of public land and parks Private investment for everything else.