[Superman]

Yes, "trickle-down" economics has been debunked. Dubya's dad called it "Voodoo Economics." And yet, any time I want to find a group of folks that continue to believe in this false conclusion, I can. Here, and in other conservative groups.

And of course, the thing that allows this false conclusion to seem plausible is the argument that tax cuts stimulate spending and/or saving. Sure, this is true. But so is the fact that people in the top tax bracket have the resources and savvy to avoid paying that rate on all but a small fraction of their total income. You can raise the top tax bracket to 100%, and not change revenues. Nobody's going to pay that. Changes in GDP result in revenue changes. Changing the top tax bracket do not. Duh.

And finally, here's a test. This is a test for you guys who consistently take the position that, always and everywhere, tax cuts will either raise gubmit revenues, or at least will not cause revenues to fall: Okay. Here we go. If this is true, they why don't we lower the marginal tax rate to 0%?

Nevertheless, I will probably never hear the end of this mythology that we can fund projects with tax cuts. It plays REALLY well with the voters. Proposing desperately-needed transportation infrastructure improvements and tax reductions at the same time is very popular with voters. Just ask Tim Eyman. Or that Rossi guy. Just don't admit you believe this to someone who actually understands public finance. Actually, Eyman and Rossi probably do understand public finance. But the mythology is still their best political tactic.