Summations Only

Which is what the phrase "income from a trust" means. And income to the trust is not income from the trust. But income to the beneficiary is.

In the first place, that's not what "trickle down" means.In the second place, following your own argument, I would be better off if rich people had less money and bought cheaper cars. At present, I cannot afford to buy the second hand car of a rich man. I am never going to be able to buy a second hand BMW or Aston Martin, that's still out of my price range. I might as well dream of buying a second-hand Lear Jet.If taxes had been so high ten years ago that all the rich man could afford was a cheap Toyota without air-conditioning, and if taxes had been so high for the last ten years that he hasn't been able to afford to change his car between then and now, when he finally upgrades, then today I might just be able to buy his ten-year-old Toyota, and his wealth would in fact have benefited me in the way that you suggest.So if you were to tax the fuck out of the rich, then in ten years' time I might be able to afford the cast-offs of a rich man, or what would be a rich man if you hadn't made him not rich through punitive taxation. Otherwise, not so much.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

FTFY.

Also there is evidence that when rich people feel warm (in July, for example) so do poor people. I can show you a graph if you like. It follows that we can keep the poor warm in winter by heating the rich.

A situation where the latter is the cause and the former is the effect of that cause.

Certainly. Here, for example, is a graph showing the weather experienced by rich people in Orlando, Florida: And here, for the purposes of comparison, is a graph showing the weather experienced by poor people in Orlando, Florida: Do you have any dumb questions? Oh, you do.Because the one does not in fact cause the other.The chain of events does not go:Rich people feel warm -> weather gets warm -> poor people feel warm.It goes:Weather gets warm -> rich and poor people alike feel warm.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

I think you'll find that the weather has an effect on the temperatures people experience. Don't tell me what I'm doing, especially if you're going to be flagrantly wrong. I didn't claim to such knowledge; I was challenging the people who were "assuming the conclusion" that it didn't. That was sarcasm. For fuck's sake.

Well, I've yet to see any evidence that it works. And given that, and given that most economic panaceas devised by our over-sanguine species have not worked, the balance of probability is that it doesn't.

Well, if the government had that money it could do those things.So the only thing we have to worry about is if the economy is so dependent on wealth trickling down from the rich that an adjustment in the top tax rate would cause the economy to collapse leaving everyone with less money, including the government.But according to your own post, this has never happened before. In previous decades we have managed to get by without the rich being so rich as they are now. Contemplating this possibility is empirically on a par with worrying if the next time I blow my nose I'll be eaten by a tiger. "In reality we don't know what would happen", you write. OK, but on the strength of the evidence before us we can make a fair guess.

Well, we know that the minimum wage has gone down in real terms. Have the prices of food and electricity gone down faster? If so, then something has gone up even faster than that, since inflation is calculated on the basis of a "shopping basket" of commonly-bought items.As for college, I said that it was harder for the middle classes to send their children to college. And so it is, in fact it's all but impossible. Hence student debt.You didn't even bother to argue with me about healthcare.

So far as I know, everyone who uses the term "trickle down" and isn't you. Yes, but in fact rich people buy expensive new cars. No, the government would be. But that's a different question.My point is simply that I cannot afford to buy the cast-offs of the rich, because they are still too expensive for me.

(Source for figures: Bureau of Labor Statistics. I haven't checked, but I think the word "Non-Farm" should go somewhere in the caption.)

FTFY.

From the Online Free Dictionary:"Trickle-down: Of or relating to the economic theory that financial benefits accorded to big businesses and wealthy investors will pass down to profit smaller businesses and consumers."Trickle-down: of or concerning the theory that granting concessions such as tax cuts to the rich will benefit all levels of society by stimulating the economy"From Merriam Webster:"Trickle-down theory: a theory that financial benefits given to big business will in turn pass down to smaller businesses and consumers."From the Oxford English Dictionary:"Trickle-down, of or based on the theory that economic benefits to particular groups will inevitably be passed on to those less well off."From the American Heritage Dictionary:"Trickle-down: Of or relating to the economic theory that financial benefits accorded to big businesses and wealthy investors will pass down to profit smaller businesses and consumers."From Wikipedia:""Trickle-down economics" and "the trickle-down theory" are terms in United States politics often used by the American right to refer to the idea that tax breaks or other economic benefits provided by government to businesses and the wealthy will benefit poorer members of society by improving the economy as a whole."---It is hard to deny that deregulation is a "financial benefit", an "economic benefit" or a "concession" offered to "big business" ... 'cos that's exactly what it is.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Blessed are the rich, for they shall inherit the Earth. As someone nearly said. It does sound a little familiar, yes. Tell us more about this mentality.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.