Utter Bollocks

It may come as a surprise to you but I have a degree in pigonomics from Cavybridge University. I don't like to talk about it because it tends to intimidate people when they realise that are in the presence of a superior intelligence. Now it has come to my attention that various politicians around the globe are taking a "Back to the Future" approach to the human equivalent - Economics. It always gives me a really good piggy giggle when I hear them say that the way to prosperity is to give tax cuts to the rich and big business. This will, they say, encourage rich to spend more and big business to employ more people, thus stimulating the economy. There is just one problem with this theory of "trickle down economics" - it is utter bollocks.

Reagan and Thatcher tried it in the nineteen eighties and made matters worse and George Dubya tried it more recently with the same result. Why doesn't it work? It doesn't work because the rich and big business has no need to spend the extra money. The rich have what they need and already have a high disposable income. Big business doesn't spend the money on employing more people. Why would it? The tax savings they make simply go towards a healthier bottom line which in turn finds it's way to the shareholders. Who are the shareholders? Mostly they're the afore mentioned rich with the already high disposable income.

Now, I may be just a carrot crunching cavy, but if there are tax breaks to be handed out wouldn't it be more productive to give them to the poor sods on low incomes? People on low incomes WILL spend the extra money that a tax break gives them. They will buy more food and all sorts of other consumables that suddenly become more affordable for them - cars, televisions, fridges, clothes, you name it. They'll go to the cinema, they'll go on holiday. They'll buy toys for their kids that they couldn't previously afford. It's a far more effective way of pumping money into the economy. The extra demand will create jobs and mean a bigger bottom line for big business and shareholders alike, so everybody wins. Now then, apart from the fact that any politician trying this approach will immediately be labeled a card carrying Marxist by certain sections of the mass media, can someone please explain to me why this is a bad idea?

On a rather sad note, you'll have to excuse me for not being my usual jovial self today. You see my male staff's mum passed away a couple of days ago and my fur is wringing wet from soaking up his tears. Once I've finished this blog post I have to help him write a eulogy for a funeral which he is unable to attend because he contacted a deep vein thrombosis and can't fly long haul until April at the earliest. On behalf of my male staff I would like to thank the many, many people who have passed on the condolences to my male staff and his family. Their thoughts and prayers are greatly appreciated. Once again I'll leave the last word to Badger's footnote.

BADGER'S FOOTNOTE
I have three black feet and one white one.