1 00:00:00,440 --> 00:00:03,880 Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff you Should Know from house Stuff Works 2 00:00:03,920 --> 00:00:12,840 Speaker 1: dot com. Hey, welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark 3 00:00:12,920 --> 00:00:16,040 Speaker 1: and there's Charles W. Chuck Bryant and Jerry and they're 4 00:00:16,120 --> 00:00:20,880 Speaker 1: snickering and tittering, and that makes this stuff you should know. Yeah, 5 00:00:21,239 --> 00:00:25,840 Speaker 1: we've got sidetracked before talking about things that trickle. Names, 6 00:00:26,440 --> 00:00:29,280 Speaker 1: names that trickle. Yes, like the famous race car driver 7 00:00:29,400 --> 00:00:32,680 Speaker 1: Dick Trickle. You say, your road dude, I swear to 8 00:00:32,720 --> 00:00:37,559 Speaker 1: God look him up. I will don't image search and 9 00:00:37,640 --> 00:00:43,560 Speaker 1: just look him up. Okay, guys specify race car. Yeah, okay, 10 00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:47,920 Speaker 1: that's a good idea. Your Google Master with your Google fou. Yes, 11 00:00:48,520 --> 00:00:50,519 Speaker 1: and we the three of us, are apparently all eight 12 00:00:50,640 --> 00:00:55,680 Speaker 1: years old again. Uh, speaking of trickle, Chuck, Hey, happy birthday. 13 00:00:56,080 --> 00:00:58,480 Speaker 1: That would be quiet. Jerry, you have a big mouth. 14 00:00:59,160 --> 00:01:02,360 Speaker 1: You're always talking. Well. I usually remember, but I don't 15 00:01:02,440 --> 00:01:05,759 Speaker 1: didn't today, So happy birthday. Thank you. I appreciate it. 16 00:01:06,160 --> 00:01:08,560 Speaker 1: And this will be out several weeks later. But right, 17 00:01:08,880 --> 00:01:13,360 Speaker 1: I'll get to relive my birthday all over again. Thanks man. 18 00:01:14,040 --> 00:01:19,440 Speaker 1: Have you Chuckers ever seen the movie Ferris Bueler's Day Off? Yeah, 19 00:01:19,600 --> 00:01:22,959 Speaker 1: and then we'd go there at some point in this one. Yeah, 20 00:01:23,600 --> 00:01:26,560 Speaker 1: because of ben Stein. Yeah, okay, good, so you know 21 00:01:26,640 --> 00:01:32,840 Speaker 1: the answer then something the o economics anyone who do economics? Yeah, 22 00:01:33,120 --> 00:01:37,240 Speaker 1: when they're an ECON class. The guy says, Bueller, Bueller, 23 00:01:37,440 --> 00:01:39,600 Speaker 1: that's ben Stein. Remember he had that show when ben 24 00:01:39,640 --> 00:01:43,399 Speaker 1: Stein's money which was really his money? Yeah it was, 25 00:01:43,400 --> 00:01:46,200 Speaker 1: wasn't it? I think so? I think le Yeah, I 26 00:01:46,240 --> 00:01:48,120 Speaker 1: think maybe like they gave it to him if it 27 00:01:48,200 --> 00:01:52,600 Speaker 1: wasn't one or came out of a salary, who knows. Um. 28 00:01:52,680 --> 00:01:55,400 Speaker 1: But before that show came on, he was in Farris 29 00:01:55,440 --> 00:01:57,520 Speaker 1: Bueller's day off as an ECON professor. And I believe 30 00:01:57,560 --> 00:02:01,720 Speaker 1: he does have a degree in economics. He's also just 31 00:02:01,760 --> 00:02:05,000 Speaker 1: a great actor and vizine pitchman. But what are he 32 00:02:05,040 --> 00:02:07,800 Speaker 1: was talking about in there? He was clear? Clear, I 33 00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:12,200 Speaker 1: thank you? Clear? Is awesome. Yeah, that's right. That sounded 34 00:02:12,280 --> 00:02:17,920 Speaker 1: like not ben Stein. That's as steiny as I get. Anyway, 35 00:02:17,960 --> 00:02:22,000 Speaker 1: he was talking about voodoo economics, and voodoo economics was 36 00:02:22,120 --> 00:02:26,639 Speaker 1: another name for trickle down economics a k a. Reaganomics. 37 00:02:26,840 --> 00:02:29,640 Speaker 1: And the person who coined the term voodoo economics do 38 00:02:29,720 --> 00:02:33,600 Speaker 1: you know John Hughes No, Yeah, it was George Bush 39 00:02:33,760 --> 00:02:37,760 Speaker 1: sr h W. Remember that Yeah. He he was running 40 00:02:37,760 --> 00:02:42,440 Speaker 1: in the primaries against Reagan and for the election before 41 00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:45,160 Speaker 1: he came on as his vice president, and he was 42 00:02:45,200 --> 00:02:50,000 Speaker 1: deriving Reagan's economic policies, specifically his belief and trickle down 43 00:02:50,040 --> 00:02:55,919 Speaker 1: economics as voodoo economics because there's some apparently, some sort 44 00:02:55,960 --> 00:02:58,040 Speaker 1: of magic to the whole thing that makes it work 45 00:02:58,200 --> 00:03:02,680 Speaker 1: rather than sound economic principle. Yeah, it occurred to me 46 00:03:02,720 --> 00:03:06,519 Speaker 1: today when I was studying the stuff that John Hughes 47 00:03:06,880 --> 00:03:10,639 Speaker 1: picked this very topic to represent the most boring thing 48 00:03:10,840 --> 00:03:14,760 Speaker 1: you could talk about. I guess so. And uh, it 49 00:03:14,840 --> 00:03:17,480 Speaker 1: took me a few times to to figure it out, 50 00:03:17,480 --> 00:03:20,160 Speaker 1: because you know, I don't My brain doesn't skew towards 51 00:03:20,280 --> 00:03:24,440 Speaker 1: understanding economics. It's it's tough to do. But I finally did, 52 00:03:24,480 --> 00:03:25,680 Speaker 1: and I was like, you know what, it's not the 53 00:03:25,720 --> 00:03:29,840 Speaker 1: most boring thing ever, it's uh, it's pretty interesting. If 54 00:03:29,880 --> 00:03:32,520 Speaker 1: I came around. That means anyone can now it's just 55 00:03:32,760 --> 00:03:38,680 Speaker 1: our um our burden to make it interesting to everybody else, right, 56 00:03:38,920 --> 00:03:43,960 Speaker 1: which we've already failed that spectacularly. That's right. So let's 57 00:03:43,960 --> 00:03:47,720 Speaker 1: talk about this idea first of all, trickle down economics. Um, 58 00:03:47,800 --> 00:03:51,040 Speaker 1: we'll explain the whole thing in detail starting in just 59 00:03:51,080 --> 00:03:53,480 Speaker 1: a moment. But we should probably say that the disclaimer 60 00:03:53,800 --> 00:03:58,120 Speaker 1: if you want to drive a fiscal conservative or a 61 00:03:58,160 --> 00:04:04,080 Speaker 1: conservative economists, or just to conservative in general. Crazy mentioned 62 00:04:04,120 --> 00:04:07,840 Speaker 1: trickle down economics. Like call what they call supply side 63 00:04:07,880 --> 00:04:11,760 Speaker 1: economics trickle down economics. It drives some bonkers. There's like, 64 00:04:11,800 --> 00:04:13,960 Speaker 1: there's no such thing as trickle down economics. It's a 65 00:04:14,080 --> 00:04:18,880 Speaker 1: derisive term. It's um it doesn't capture the spirit or 66 00:04:18,920 --> 00:04:22,400 Speaker 1: the thought behind supply side economics, which is what they've 67 00:04:22,400 --> 00:04:24,520 Speaker 1: come around to call it. But back in the day, 68 00:04:24,560 --> 00:04:27,279 Speaker 1: it was definitely called trickle down economics. And the whole point, 69 00:04:27,600 --> 00:04:30,120 Speaker 1: the reason why it was called trickle down economics, is 70 00:04:30,160 --> 00:04:35,960 Speaker 1: that the idea behind it is if you place wealth 71 00:04:36,839 --> 00:04:41,880 Speaker 1: with the wealthiest people, this idea goes they will take 72 00:04:41,920 --> 00:04:45,160 Speaker 1: that money and invested into the economy, which will get 73 00:04:45,200 --> 00:04:49,440 Speaker 1: things running again, and as a result, that economic engine 74 00:04:49,440 --> 00:04:52,400 Speaker 1: revving up will create more wealth at the top that 75 00:04:52,520 --> 00:04:57,479 Speaker 1: trickles down to the lower working and middle classes. Yeah, like, 76 00:04:57,520 --> 00:05:00,600 Speaker 1: who better to stimulate the economy than the super rich, 77 00:05:01,360 --> 00:05:05,320 Speaker 1: and they will like maybe open a business to put 78 00:05:05,320 --> 00:05:08,120 Speaker 1: people to work, and then those workers will benefit and 79 00:05:08,400 --> 00:05:12,640 Speaker 1: uh directly from that investment that that person made right. 80 00:05:12,680 --> 00:05:14,839 Speaker 1: So this is the whole tree behind it. We should 81 00:05:14,839 --> 00:05:19,880 Speaker 1: also disclaim even further that economics as a field is 82 00:05:20,080 --> 00:05:27,159 Speaker 1: so far from science it's preposterous. Um. Most economic theory 83 00:05:27,200 --> 00:05:30,239 Speaker 1: that you ever will run into from John Maynard Keynes 84 00:05:30,440 --> 00:05:36,640 Speaker 1: or Adam Smith or um Jean Baptiste, Um. These guys 85 00:05:36,720 --> 00:05:42,320 Speaker 1: are talking about pure economies the United States, and I 86 00:05:42,360 --> 00:05:45,039 Speaker 1: don't think there's any economy in the world that is 87 00:05:45,200 --> 00:05:49,680 Speaker 1: a pure economy, free market economy. The United States has 88 00:05:49,760 --> 00:05:55,880 Speaker 1: things like tariffs, and um, we have things like government intervention, 89 00:05:56,040 --> 00:06:00,800 Speaker 1: tax policy, monetary policy. There's intervention in the markets. So 90 00:06:00,920 --> 00:06:05,120 Speaker 1: you can't ever say. We can't say really what causes 91 00:06:05,160 --> 00:06:07,880 Speaker 1: recessions and what brings us out of them, or whether 92 00:06:08,000 --> 00:06:11,520 Speaker 1: trickle down economics is effective or if it's not, or 93 00:06:11,560 --> 00:06:13,640 Speaker 1: if it is effective, is it effective in the long 94 00:06:13,720 --> 00:06:16,200 Speaker 1: run or the short run? And what about the opposite way, 95 00:06:16,279 --> 00:06:18,360 Speaker 1: is that effective in the long run or the short run? 96 00:06:18,680 --> 00:06:21,560 Speaker 1: We don't know. People think they do though. That is 97 00:06:21,640 --> 00:06:23,960 Speaker 1: the thing. That's why like this kind of stuff can 98 00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:26,520 Speaker 1: get people's blood boiling. So like the point of this 99 00:06:26,560 --> 00:06:28,880 Speaker 1: one is to just talk about trickle down economics and 100 00:06:28,960 --> 00:06:30,920 Speaker 1: the theory behind it and why it may or may 101 00:06:30,960 --> 00:06:35,320 Speaker 1: not work, and um, on the caveat that we don't know, 102 00:06:35,720 --> 00:06:38,800 Speaker 1: and neither do economists. Yeah, I think I left this 103 00:06:38,839 --> 00:06:41,320 Speaker 1: at a little frustrated after my research because I thought 104 00:06:41,320 --> 00:06:45,360 Speaker 1: I would come away with an answer. Um. But I mean, 105 00:06:45,400 --> 00:06:47,760 Speaker 1: if you look up Reaganomics, which is another name for 106 00:06:47,800 --> 00:06:53,960 Speaker 1: Reagan's version of the supply side economics, you will find article, 107 00:06:54,080 --> 00:06:57,200 Speaker 1: well more than that, but hundred articles on how what 108 00:06:57,279 --> 00:06:59,960 Speaker 1: a great success it was and then the abject failure 109 00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:03,480 Speaker 1: of reagonomics, and no one is going to agree. I 110 00:07:03,520 --> 00:07:05,680 Speaker 1: looked at some of these theories and said, well, that 111 00:07:05,760 --> 00:07:07,840 Speaker 1: makes sense in an ideal world. Then I look at 112 00:07:07,839 --> 00:07:09,800 Speaker 1: the opposite and think, well that makes sense in an 113 00:07:09,840 --> 00:07:12,400 Speaker 1: ideal world. And I don't I don't know if you, 114 00:07:12,560 --> 00:07:14,240 Speaker 1: like you said, I don't know if you can. I 115 00:07:14,280 --> 00:07:15,920 Speaker 1: don't know if there is an answer. Even though everyone 116 00:07:16,000 --> 00:07:20,400 Speaker 1: thinks that they're right, both people can't be right both sides. No, 117 00:07:20,560 --> 00:07:24,960 Speaker 1: it's true, because these are very opposite in most cases ideas. Yeah, 118 00:07:24,960 --> 00:07:27,040 Speaker 1: but what I did find was a bunch of articles 119 00:07:27,760 --> 00:07:33,160 Speaker 1: after digging further that said the failures and successes of Reaganomics. 120 00:07:34,000 --> 00:07:35,960 Speaker 1: And I think, to me, that's probably a little more 121 00:07:35,960 --> 00:07:39,160 Speaker 1: accurate because it is in a black and white situation. Well, 122 00:07:39,200 --> 00:07:42,160 Speaker 1: the part of the problem is is if you point 123 00:07:42,240 --> 00:07:47,320 Speaker 1: to Reagan's tax policies, right, and and Reagan is tied 124 00:07:47,360 --> 00:07:50,360 Speaker 1: to trickle down economics, and we'll get into the history, 125 00:07:50,440 --> 00:07:52,680 Speaker 1: like we'll clear all this up. But he's not really 126 00:07:52,760 --> 00:07:55,920 Speaker 1: the first one to implement this, but he's he's tied 127 00:07:55,960 --> 00:07:58,320 Speaker 1: to it. But if you look at reaganomics, the problem 128 00:07:58,360 --> 00:08:02,920 Speaker 1: is this, Chuck. If if you say, well, the nineties 129 00:08:02,960 --> 00:08:06,240 Speaker 1: were very prosperous with the dot com boom um and 130 00:08:06,280 --> 00:08:11,360 Speaker 1: the the Nasdaq hit like like a record ten thousand 131 00:08:11,440 --> 00:08:14,440 Speaker 1: points at like in the nineties, all that was from 132 00:08:14,480 --> 00:08:16,760 Speaker 1: Reagan's policies, Well you can't say that that was from 133 00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:21,000 Speaker 1: Reagan's policies. We we don't know. We just simply don't know. 134 00:08:21,320 --> 00:08:24,520 Speaker 1: Was it something short term that the Clinton administration was doing, 135 00:08:24,800 --> 00:08:28,840 Speaker 1: or was it the long term effects of Reagan's text cuts. 136 00:08:29,520 --> 00:08:32,760 Speaker 1: We don't know. Yeah, and we're going to get scores 137 00:08:32,800 --> 00:08:35,679 Speaker 1: of email from people saying what we do know, but 138 00:08:35,720 --> 00:08:38,840 Speaker 1: we don't know, So just send your email. It's fine, 139 00:08:38,880 --> 00:08:42,800 Speaker 1: but you're wrong. Uh, well, I guess we should go 140 00:08:42,800 --> 00:08:45,520 Speaker 1: ahead and say too that just the name trickled down 141 00:08:45,679 --> 00:08:49,800 Speaker 1: was coined by Will Rogers, famous Humorous in the nineteen twenties. 142 00:08:50,240 --> 00:08:53,160 Speaker 1: It is not a nineteen eighties thing. It had been 143 00:08:53,200 --> 00:08:55,760 Speaker 1: around for a while and he said, quote the money 144 00:08:55,800 --> 00:08:58,040 Speaker 1: was all appropriated for the top in hopes that it 145 00:08:58,080 --> 00:09:01,040 Speaker 1: would trickle down to the needy. And that's where started 146 00:09:01,080 --> 00:09:06,680 Speaker 1: to get it a derogatory feel around that name for sure. 147 00:09:06,760 --> 00:09:10,640 Speaker 1: Since the twenties and and over time, um, especially since 148 00:09:10,679 --> 00:09:16,400 Speaker 1: the eighties, the people who champion trickle down economics or 149 00:09:16,440 --> 00:09:20,280 Speaker 1: this this particular version of trickle down tax policy have 150 00:09:20,559 --> 00:09:24,079 Speaker 1: tried to distance themselves from the term trickle down because 151 00:09:24,120 --> 00:09:26,280 Speaker 1: it does seem elitist and it seems like a big 152 00:09:26,280 --> 00:09:31,560 Speaker 1: wealth transfer, which in fact it is. Um. Let's let's 153 00:09:31,600 --> 00:09:39,160 Speaker 1: talk about this. Trickle down policy isn't necessarily um associated 154 00:09:39,200 --> 00:09:44,200 Speaker 1: with Reagan's tax cuts. The whole idea is behind trickle down. 155 00:09:44,200 --> 00:09:46,600 Speaker 1: As I said already, as you take wealth and you 156 00:09:46,800 --> 00:09:52,080 Speaker 1: give it to the wealthiest people, that's that's what's done. 157 00:09:52,480 --> 00:09:55,720 Speaker 1: It's a wealth transfer, and it's usually done at a 158 00:09:55,800 --> 00:09:58,200 Speaker 1: time when you're in an economic slump, so you're hoping 159 00:09:58,240 --> 00:10:00,560 Speaker 1: to revitalize things. Yeah, it's the g we're meant trying 160 00:10:00,559 --> 00:10:04,040 Speaker 1: to smooth out the rough spots in the national economy, 161 00:10:04,200 --> 00:10:08,000 Speaker 1: like a k A. Recessions. Um, so you're transferring wealth. 162 00:10:08,240 --> 00:10:11,880 Speaker 1: You're transferring wealth though on the premise that that money 163 00:10:12,240 --> 00:10:18,000 Speaker 1: is going to be reinvested, reinvigorated, used to reinvigorate the economy. Right, 164 00:10:18,120 --> 00:10:20,360 Speaker 1: So it is a wealth transferred, but with the one 165 00:10:20,400 --> 00:10:24,240 Speaker 1: we're talking about today specifically, Um, we're talking about Reagan's version. 166 00:10:24,520 --> 00:10:28,840 Speaker 1: So it's a wealth transferred through tax cuts. Right. So 167 00:10:28,880 --> 00:10:32,560 Speaker 1: when Reagan came into office, Uh, he took over a 168 00:10:32,640 --> 00:10:37,360 Speaker 1: tax policy where the highest tax rate was like seventy. 169 00:10:38,880 --> 00:10:43,280 Speaker 1: The highest earners were paying seventy on their highest income, 170 00:10:43,559 --> 00:10:46,079 Speaker 1: and he got that down to about fifty. Yeah, which 171 00:10:46,120 --> 00:10:49,959 Speaker 1: is still seems incredibly high today in an age where 172 00:10:50,000 --> 00:10:54,240 Speaker 1: we're paying like thirty the highest earners are. So the 173 00:10:54,280 --> 00:10:59,000 Speaker 1: point is is Reagan did it through tax cuts. But 174 00:10:59,200 --> 00:11:02,120 Speaker 1: the that doesn't mean like trickle down economics don't doesn't 175 00:11:02,120 --> 00:11:06,880 Speaker 1: equal text cuts necessarily, it's it's that's that's one way 176 00:11:06,880 --> 00:11:10,320 Speaker 1: of putting more money into the hands of the wealthiest, 177 00:11:10,720 --> 00:11:14,439 Speaker 1: right Exactly. It's really a question of supply and demand. 178 00:11:14,480 --> 00:11:17,000 Speaker 1: And I guess we can go back through time. A 179 00:11:17,000 --> 00:11:20,880 Speaker 1: little bit to John bptis say who you mentioned, uh, 180 00:11:21,040 --> 00:11:26,000 Speaker 1: nineteenth century French economists, and his his philosophy has been 181 00:11:26,040 --> 00:11:29,360 Speaker 1: misinterpreted a lot as supply creates its own demand. It's 182 00:11:29,360 --> 00:11:32,880 Speaker 1: not exactly right. What he was really saying is products 183 00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:36,120 Speaker 1: are paid for with products, and money just had like 184 00:11:36,200 --> 00:11:40,040 Speaker 1: a temporary function. Um. Yeah, Like if you are somebody 185 00:11:40,040 --> 00:11:44,040 Speaker 1: who produces something, when you produce that something, that item, 186 00:11:44,080 --> 00:11:47,240 Speaker 1: when you go make that shoe and you're gonna sell 187 00:11:47,320 --> 00:11:49,600 Speaker 1: your shoe, which is with the whole reason you made 188 00:11:49,640 --> 00:11:52,040 Speaker 1: the shoe in the first place, and then with that 189 00:11:52,120 --> 00:11:55,040 Speaker 1: money you can go use it to buy other goods 190 00:11:55,040 --> 00:11:58,880 Speaker 1: and services. So the production of that shoe created a 191 00:11:58,920 --> 00:12:04,080 Speaker 1: wage for you, which in turn stimulated consumption demand from 192 00:12:04,120 --> 00:12:07,200 Speaker 1: you for something else. Yeah, product is paid for the product. 193 00:12:07,800 --> 00:12:11,440 Speaker 1: The misinterpretation that supply creates its own demand is it's 194 00:12:11,480 --> 00:12:14,920 Speaker 1: just a bastardized version. And that basically means that there 195 00:12:15,200 --> 00:12:17,480 Speaker 1: would never be a failed product, like you can just 196 00:12:17,480 --> 00:12:21,920 Speaker 1: produce and produce and produce, which isn't sound No, that's insane, 197 00:12:22,000 --> 00:12:24,960 Speaker 1: And I think Say would have said that that is 198 00:12:24,960 --> 00:12:28,000 Speaker 1: not true as well. Well, he did he did um 199 00:12:28,280 --> 00:12:30,640 Speaker 1: during his lifetime even say like, well, no, I mean 200 00:12:30,720 --> 00:12:33,680 Speaker 1: there it's possible that there is such a thing as 201 00:12:33,760 --> 00:12:36,240 Speaker 1: over production. Sure. I mean, like if you think about it, 202 00:12:36,280 --> 00:12:39,920 Speaker 1: like during the uh the housing market crash, Yeah, it's 203 00:12:40,000 --> 00:12:42,880 Speaker 1: starting a few years ago. There was a glut of 204 00:12:42,920 --> 00:12:45,760 Speaker 1: homes on the market. And it's not like the people 205 00:12:45,760 --> 00:12:48,920 Speaker 1: who are building homes just merely went on building homes 206 00:12:48,920 --> 00:12:52,440 Speaker 1: and building homes and building homes. Like once the demand ceased, 207 00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:55,680 Speaker 1: they stopped producing, and we still had a glut on 208 00:12:55,760 --> 00:12:58,440 Speaker 1: the market and the ones who were still just thinking 209 00:12:58,440 --> 00:13:01,800 Speaker 1: money and to build, like build, just stop basically. Yeah, 210 00:13:02,080 --> 00:13:04,880 Speaker 1: And it was because there was an oversupply because demand 211 00:13:04,920 --> 00:13:08,040 Speaker 1: had ceased. So the idea that that if you if 212 00:13:08,080 --> 00:13:11,760 Speaker 1: you produce it, demand will come on a short term 213 00:13:11,800 --> 00:13:15,600 Speaker 1: basis is this kind of a fallacy. Yeah, but in 214 00:13:16,080 --> 00:13:19,559 Speaker 1: the earlier days of this country, a lot of big 215 00:13:19,559 --> 00:13:25,120 Speaker 1: thinkers agreed with him, like Jefferson. Um. But the tide 216 00:13:25,160 --> 00:13:28,760 Speaker 1: turned later on in our country with the introduction of 217 00:13:28,880 --> 00:13:31,839 Speaker 1: Mr Keynes Keensie and economics. Yeah, so we've talked about 218 00:13:31,920 --> 00:13:35,080 Speaker 1: in our audio book. Yeah, we did stuff you should know, 219 00:13:35,520 --> 00:13:38,680 Speaker 1: super Stuff Guide to the Economy, Yeah, which is probably 220 00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:42,319 Speaker 1: super outdated, I wonder, but there are some I think 221 00:13:42,320 --> 00:13:44,840 Speaker 1: there's some evergreen content in there. Yeah. I mean it 222 00:13:44,920 --> 00:13:49,880 Speaker 1: was like an economics one on one course with us. Yeah. Um, 223 00:13:49,960 --> 00:13:52,760 Speaker 1: but so so. The basis of Says law is that 224 00:13:53,240 --> 00:13:59,079 Speaker 1: if you stimulate um production, then you'll get the economy 225 00:13:59,080 --> 00:14:02,200 Speaker 1: going again. And it was implemented for a while like 226 00:14:02,280 --> 00:14:05,119 Speaker 1: some of the some of the early twentieth century presidents 227 00:14:05,160 --> 00:14:12,640 Speaker 1: like Hoover, among others like Harding and Coolidge, well JFK. Later, 228 00:14:12,679 --> 00:14:15,400 Speaker 1: but early on in the twentieth century, Harding and Coolidge 229 00:14:15,440 --> 00:14:20,040 Speaker 1: both implemented, um, this kind of what's called supply side 230 00:14:20,640 --> 00:14:24,600 Speaker 1: policy text policy right where that where if you stimulate 231 00:14:24,640 --> 00:14:30,360 Speaker 1: production through lowering taxes at the top and we'll tell 232 00:14:30,400 --> 00:14:32,960 Speaker 1: you in a second how those two are correlated, Um, 233 00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:36,360 Speaker 1: you can get the economy going. Yet. Well, Hoover also 234 00:14:36,600 --> 00:14:40,360 Speaker 1: followed the same policy, and under Hoover's watch the Great 235 00:14:40,360 --> 00:14:44,640 Speaker 1: Depression happened. Yeah, which would cause any just regular thinking person, 236 00:14:44,680 --> 00:14:46,920 Speaker 1: even if they don't understand economics, to think, hey, we're 237 00:14:46,960 --> 00:14:50,960 Speaker 1: doing it wrong. Right, So Roosevelt came along, That's right. 238 00:14:51,160 --> 00:14:53,480 Speaker 1: Roosevelt held the opposite view, and he was very much 239 00:14:53,480 --> 00:14:56,320 Speaker 1: a Kinesian and he was operating at the same time 240 00:14:56,360 --> 00:15:01,560 Speaker 1: that Keynes was writing and working himself, and John Maynard 241 00:15:01,640 --> 00:15:04,479 Speaker 1: Kane said, no, no, no, you guys have it backwards. 242 00:15:05,240 --> 00:15:10,080 Speaker 1: You don't stimulate the supply, you stimulate the demand. Then 243 00:15:10,120 --> 00:15:12,160 Speaker 1: all of a sudden, if you have a housing glut 244 00:15:12,520 --> 00:15:15,640 Speaker 1: and you suddenly have people who have more money to spend, 245 00:15:16,040 --> 00:15:18,080 Speaker 1: they'll take care of your housing glut and then things 246 00:15:18,160 --> 00:15:21,360 Speaker 1: can get back to normal. We reach equilibrium again. Yeah, 247 00:15:21,360 --> 00:15:25,400 Speaker 1: he was about, uh, short term ideas, short term fixes, 248 00:15:25,480 --> 00:15:31,440 Speaker 1: maybe lower interest rates, maybe taxes, fiscal policy, taxes and spending. 249 00:15:31,840 --> 00:15:34,120 Speaker 1: Basically what you hear a lot about these days. It 250 00:15:34,920 --> 00:15:37,800 Speaker 1: you know, Kenzie and economics kind of lasted a long 251 00:15:37,840 --> 00:15:40,920 Speaker 1: time until probably Kennedy and then Reagan. It's like there's 252 00:15:40,920 --> 00:15:43,840 Speaker 1: only been a handful of US presidents really endorse the 253 00:15:43,880 --> 00:15:47,920 Speaker 1: trickle down theory. Yeah, like wholeheartedly since the twentieth century. Yeah, 254 00:15:48,400 --> 00:15:53,400 Speaker 1: um so yeah, it's the Keynesian policies ruled, and it 255 00:15:53,480 --> 00:15:57,000 Speaker 1: was very much about like cutting taxes for the lower 256 00:15:57,040 --> 00:16:00,960 Speaker 1: and middle and working classes, increase texas for the rich. 257 00:16:01,040 --> 00:16:04,520 Speaker 1: Because if you if you're a government, you still need revenue, right, 258 00:16:04,840 --> 00:16:06,600 Speaker 1: so you can't just cut texas for everybody. If you 259 00:16:06,640 --> 00:16:08,600 Speaker 1: cut Texas for one group, you kind of need to 260 00:16:08,640 --> 00:16:10,880 Speaker 1: increase it for another because you still need your money 261 00:16:10,920 --> 00:16:13,800 Speaker 1: coming in. Of course, you could also take the radical 262 00:16:13,840 --> 00:16:18,040 Speaker 1: step of figuring out how to eliminate waste and blow 263 00:16:18,240 --> 00:16:20,120 Speaker 1: in government. That would help a lot, but we're not 264 00:16:20,160 --> 00:16:23,280 Speaker 1: talking about that in this one. We're talking about trickle 265 00:16:23,320 --> 00:16:28,040 Speaker 1: down economics. So then along comes Kennedy who says, hey, 266 00:16:28,160 --> 00:16:31,800 Speaker 1: or my dad was a pretty rich so I'm kind 267 00:16:31,800 --> 00:16:35,040 Speaker 1: of thinking that this trickle down thing might work. So 268 00:16:35,080 --> 00:16:38,080 Speaker 1: he got into supply side economics. And then when Reagan 269 00:16:38,160 --> 00:16:41,640 Speaker 1: came along, he really championed this whole idea. And it 270 00:16:41,680 --> 00:16:44,000 Speaker 1: was out of a result of some guys in the 271 00:16:44,040 --> 00:16:48,800 Speaker 1: seventies saying, um, there's this whole other thing that we've 272 00:16:48,800 --> 00:16:52,280 Speaker 1: been ignoring, which is this trickle down tax policy that 273 00:16:52,320 --> 00:16:54,840 Speaker 1: we should implement, and they got Reagan into it and 274 00:16:55,000 --> 00:16:58,280 Speaker 1: he implemented it. Yeah, and uh, after this message break 275 00:16:58,280 --> 00:16:59,680 Speaker 1: coming up here in a sec we're going to talk 276 00:16:59,720 --> 00:17:01,400 Speaker 1: a little a bit about if it doesn't sound like 277 00:17:01,440 --> 00:17:04,919 Speaker 1: it makes sense to you, there's a certain curve that 278 00:17:04,960 --> 00:17:11,040 Speaker 1: will explain that might clear it up for you. All Right, 279 00:17:11,200 --> 00:17:13,840 Speaker 1: So we're gonna talk about the Laugher curve. Which was 280 00:17:13,880 --> 00:17:17,920 Speaker 1: also in Ferry Spueller. Oh was it? Yeah, he says, 281 00:17:18,000 --> 00:17:20,200 Speaker 1: Laugher curve. But in high school, I had no idea. 282 00:17:20,359 --> 00:17:22,520 Speaker 1: But I was like, what are those words together? I 283 00:17:22,520 --> 00:17:25,119 Speaker 1: don't understand. Laugher was a person l A f f 284 00:17:25,240 --> 00:17:30,879 Speaker 1: e er and um. The Laugher curve helps explain a 285 00:17:30,880 --> 00:17:35,280 Speaker 1: little bit why trickle down economics could possibly work. Is 286 00:17:35,320 --> 00:17:37,000 Speaker 1: that a good neutral way to say that, I would 287 00:17:37,000 --> 00:17:40,000 Speaker 1: say so. Uh. The idea of the Laugher curve curve 288 00:17:40,160 --> 00:17:43,800 Speaker 1: is that the relationship between taxes and revenues is a 289 00:17:43,840 --> 00:17:47,879 Speaker 1: curve instead of a direct relationship. So at a certain point, 290 00:17:48,640 --> 00:17:51,359 Speaker 1: let's say you own a company making shoes and you 291 00:17:52,000 --> 00:17:55,760 Speaker 1: grows ten million dollars through like the first two financial quarters, 292 00:17:56,240 --> 00:17:59,479 Speaker 1: and your tax that let's say, and you know, if 293 00:17:59,480 --> 00:18:01,679 Speaker 1: you make any more money than you're gonna jump up 294 00:18:01,680 --> 00:18:07,160 Speaker 1: into that text uh tax category. You might slow down production, 295 00:18:07,160 --> 00:18:09,680 Speaker 1: you might halt the production altogether. And so you know what, 296 00:18:09,720 --> 00:18:12,640 Speaker 1: I'm gonna take off the rest of the year, maybe 297 00:18:12,640 --> 00:18:14,679 Speaker 1: even put these people out of work for four to 298 00:18:14,760 --> 00:18:18,040 Speaker 1: six months furlow furlough and because I don't want to 299 00:18:18,080 --> 00:18:20,919 Speaker 1: be text anymore. So if you look at that on 300 00:18:21,080 --> 00:18:26,800 Speaker 1: a graph, it's gonna be if you text people, they're 301 00:18:26,800 --> 00:18:29,120 Speaker 1: not gonna work. If you text people zero percent, you're 302 00:18:29,119 --> 00:18:32,520 Speaker 1: not getting any money. So in the middle of there 303 00:18:32,760 --> 00:18:37,199 Speaker 1: is the curve, right It Basically Laughers curve suggests that 304 00:18:37,640 --> 00:18:43,159 Speaker 1: the correlation between UM tax rates and tax revenue is 305 00:18:43,200 --> 00:18:46,639 Speaker 1: not totally positive. At some point it starts to go 306 00:18:46,760 --> 00:18:49,439 Speaker 1: back down. Yeah, that's called the prohibitive range. At a 307 00:18:49,440 --> 00:18:52,480 Speaker 1: certain point, people don't want to be text in that range. Yeah, 308 00:18:52,520 --> 00:18:56,120 Speaker 1: And it's not even necessarily that they are not working 309 00:18:56,160 --> 00:18:59,879 Speaker 1: any longer because they resent being taxed. What laugh For 310 00:19:00,160 --> 00:19:03,240 Speaker 1: was pointing out is that there is this prohibitive range, 311 00:19:03,240 --> 00:19:08,880 Speaker 1: and within the prohibitive range, UM, you remove the incentive 312 00:19:08,960 --> 00:19:13,360 Speaker 1: to work. Theoretically, where UM and Jay mcgrathrough wrote this, 313 00:19:13,600 --> 00:19:17,239 Speaker 1: Uh gave a pretty good UM example where it's like, 314 00:19:17,400 --> 00:19:21,879 Speaker 1: if you make that money and you are text that's tolerable, 315 00:19:21,960 --> 00:19:24,000 Speaker 1: you're still gonna make You still get to keep fifty 316 00:19:24,040 --> 00:19:28,960 Speaker 1: percent for yourself. But when you're texting that nine percentile, UH, 317 00:19:29,400 --> 00:19:32,160 Speaker 1: you're let's say you were going to make another million dollars, 318 00:19:33,080 --> 00:19:35,440 Speaker 1: you have to give nine thousand of it to the government. 319 00:19:35,480 --> 00:19:37,760 Speaker 1: You just get to keep a hundred thousand, Well, you 320 00:19:37,840 --> 00:19:40,040 Speaker 1: might decide to just go and spend the rest of 321 00:19:40,040 --> 00:19:42,480 Speaker 1: the year at your beach house with the money that 322 00:19:42,520 --> 00:19:45,359 Speaker 1: you did make, not because you resent being texted, because 323 00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:48,520 Speaker 1: it's just not worth it to to exert that effort 324 00:19:48,520 --> 00:19:50,560 Speaker 1: to make that next million dollars when you just get 325 00:19:50,560 --> 00:19:52,879 Speaker 1: to keep a hundred thousand of it. So at that 326 00:19:52,920 --> 00:19:57,320 Speaker 1: point in that prohibitive range, the text policy is effectively 327 00:19:59,000 --> 00:20:02,480 Speaker 1: keeping people from working, inducing them to not work any longer, 328 00:20:02,680 --> 00:20:05,040 Speaker 1: which is bad for an economy. And that's if you're 329 00:20:05,640 --> 00:20:09,080 Speaker 1: if your work, if your income is directly related to 330 00:20:09,280 --> 00:20:12,480 Speaker 1: your work, right, you could conceivably, if you owned a 331 00:20:12,520 --> 00:20:15,000 Speaker 1: factory or something, and you didn't have to really exert 332 00:20:15,040 --> 00:20:18,280 Speaker 1: any problems and you could still make payroll and all 333 00:20:18,359 --> 00:20:20,800 Speaker 1: that stuff, it might be worth it to just leave 334 00:20:20,840 --> 00:20:22,919 Speaker 1: it to these other people to make that extra hundred 335 00:20:22,920 --> 00:20:26,399 Speaker 1: thousand dollars for you, rather than go off to the beachuse. 336 00:20:26,480 --> 00:20:31,200 Speaker 1: But if you your effort directly um is tax then yes, 337 00:20:31,320 --> 00:20:35,760 Speaker 1: it would become a disincentive towards work. Conceivably. We should 338 00:20:35,760 --> 00:20:38,320 Speaker 1: point out Chuck and Jane didn't do a very good 339 00:20:38,359 --> 00:20:41,680 Speaker 1: job of doing that in this In this article, Laugher's 340 00:20:41,800 --> 00:20:46,359 Speaker 1: curve is a thought experiment. It's not based on data. 341 00:20:46,960 --> 00:20:49,760 Speaker 1: It's not um hard and fast rule or a law. 342 00:20:49,920 --> 00:20:55,080 Speaker 1: It's basically an intuitive idea of tax rates and their 343 00:20:55,119 --> 00:20:58,240 Speaker 1: effect on tax revenue. Yeah, but if you don't even 344 00:20:58,280 --> 00:21:00,639 Speaker 1: have to be a business owner, Let's say you're just 345 00:21:00,680 --> 00:21:02,960 Speaker 1: a regular employee that makes a salary, you have a 346 00:21:03,000 --> 00:21:06,080 Speaker 1: salary sweet spot as well. You know, if it's great 347 00:21:06,119 --> 00:21:08,640 Speaker 1: to get promotions and to get raises, but if you're 348 00:21:08,680 --> 00:21:12,560 Speaker 1: really climbing the ladder at a certain point, you might think, Man, 349 00:21:13,440 --> 00:21:16,640 Speaker 1: I got a big raise, and I'm making barely any 350 00:21:16,640 --> 00:21:19,600 Speaker 1: more money than i made before this big promotion because 351 00:21:19,600 --> 00:21:22,639 Speaker 1: I've been kicked into a higher tax bracket. So that's 352 00:21:22,920 --> 00:21:25,479 Speaker 1: the prohibitive range. And you know can apply to you. 353 00:21:25,560 --> 00:21:27,800 Speaker 1: I mean you can't. You don't stop working. No, But 354 00:21:27,880 --> 00:21:30,880 Speaker 1: you may say, I don't actually want that promotion because 355 00:21:30,920 --> 00:21:33,680 Speaker 1: it's going to be more responsibility and really not much 356 00:21:33,720 --> 00:21:36,120 Speaker 1: more money. So I'm gonna hang out right here rather 357 00:21:36,200 --> 00:21:40,399 Speaker 1: than keep going in my little range or whatever it is. 358 00:21:42,320 --> 00:21:46,800 Speaker 1: So that's Laugher's curve, and that's a it's a kind 359 00:21:46,800 --> 00:21:51,320 Speaker 1: of the basis of trickle down tax policy. It's the 360 00:21:51,400 --> 00:21:56,160 Speaker 1: idea that Okay, there is a point where you can 361 00:21:56,359 --> 00:22:01,760 Speaker 1: tax too much and now you're actually slowing down the economy. So, 362 00:22:03,680 --> 00:22:07,000 Speaker 1: based on Laugher's curve, when you're looking at it through 363 00:22:07,280 --> 00:22:12,679 Speaker 1: um through trickle down policy, there's a point then that's that, 364 00:22:12,840 --> 00:22:14,840 Speaker 1: like you said, there's a sweet spot as far as 365 00:22:14,920 --> 00:22:18,760 Speaker 1: text revenue goes, and it creates this seeming paradox where 366 00:22:18,760 --> 00:22:22,520 Speaker 1: if you cut tax rates at a certain point, you'll 367 00:22:22,520 --> 00:22:27,679 Speaker 1: actually increase tax revenue because people will be incentivized to 368 00:22:27,720 --> 00:22:32,040 Speaker 1: work more throughout the year. And the other basis of 369 00:22:32,119 --> 00:22:38,080 Speaker 1: trickle down theory is that you are going to put 370 00:22:38,119 --> 00:22:41,640 Speaker 1: more money or keep more money with the people at 371 00:22:41,680 --> 00:22:46,600 Speaker 1: the wealthiest people who under this idea are more likely 372 00:22:46,680 --> 00:22:51,000 Speaker 1: to um invest it back into the economy, right, and 373 00:22:51,040 --> 00:22:57,160 Speaker 1: when they do that, supposedly allegedly, the economy booms. Yeah, 374 00:22:57,200 --> 00:22:59,639 Speaker 1: what you can account for is just the single person. 375 00:22:59,720 --> 00:23:03,800 Speaker 1: This is looked at in the broadest terms, because somebody 376 00:23:03,800 --> 00:23:05,400 Speaker 1: could make all their money and just sit on it 377 00:23:05,680 --> 00:23:09,639 Speaker 1: in the bank, which isn't reinvesting it. That is a really, really, 378 00:23:09,760 --> 00:23:13,080 Speaker 1: really big point. You'll remember back at the beginning of 379 00:23:13,080 --> 00:23:16,480 Speaker 1: this recession, the FED was doing everything it could to 380 00:23:16,960 --> 00:23:23,000 Speaker 1: cheapen lending and still has been and uh, it didn't 381 00:23:23,040 --> 00:23:28,359 Speaker 1: do anything. Like you have to take into account things 382 00:23:28,480 --> 00:23:35,680 Speaker 1: like um insecurity, fear, um just being human, yes, being human, 383 00:23:35,760 --> 00:23:40,600 Speaker 1: Like we're not necessarily rationally maximizing actors. Humans are like 384 00:23:40,640 --> 00:23:43,760 Speaker 1: there is such thing as fear and the idea that 385 00:23:43,840 --> 00:23:47,960 Speaker 1: maybe hoarding money is best. So what's possible then if 386 00:23:48,000 --> 00:23:51,120 Speaker 1: you follow this trickle down tax policy, is you're taking 387 00:23:51,200 --> 00:23:56,240 Speaker 1: money from everybody else and giving it to the rich. 388 00:23:57,040 --> 00:24:00,000 Speaker 1: Or if your head just spun because your fiscal conservative, 389 00:24:00,560 --> 00:24:03,440 Speaker 1: what you're doing is allowing the rich to keep more 390 00:24:03,520 --> 00:24:07,120 Speaker 1: of their income, but they're not doing anything with it 391 00:24:08,160 --> 00:24:11,399 Speaker 1: right at least as a short term fixed that's not 392 00:24:11,520 --> 00:24:14,879 Speaker 1: a good idea because you can probably bet that eventually 393 00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:19,280 Speaker 1: the rich are going to take that money and invested 394 00:24:19,320 --> 00:24:23,480 Speaker 1: back in the economy. But it's not. Yes, but when's 395 00:24:23,520 --> 00:24:26,359 Speaker 1: that going to happen? You can't really say. And part 396 00:24:26,359 --> 00:24:29,320 Speaker 1: of the other problem with it is is that you 397 00:24:29,400 --> 00:24:33,360 Speaker 1: are then also basically handing money out at a fire sale. 398 00:24:34,200 --> 00:24:36,560 Speaker 1: You're saying, hey, here's a bunch of money invested back 399 00:24:36,600 --> 00:24:40,480 Speaker 1: in the economy. And have we mentioned the bargain basement 400 00:24:40,600 --> 00:24:43,240 Speaker 1: rates you can get on all of these businesses over 401 00:24:43,280 --> 00:24:48,320 Speaker 1: here because the economy is in a recession. Yeah, very much, so, 402 00:24:48,400 --> 00:24:51,280 Speaker 1: you know. And it's it's like it is literally a 403 00:24:51,320 --> 00:24:55,040 Speaker 1: wealth transfer, and under some circumstances like the recession that 404 00:24:55,080 --> 00:24:58,480 Speaker 1: we're still coming out of now, it is a wealth 405 00:24:58,520 --> 00:25:03,760 Speaker 1: transfer and an asset transfer, and that the people who 406 00:25:03,800 --> 00:25:07,560 Speaker 1: have the most money, the wealthy, also have the most 407 00:25:07,600 --> 00:25:11,720 Speaker 1: buying power and they have the best bargains. Yeah. Thomas 408 00:25:11,760 --> 00:25:15,320 Speaker 1: Sowell is a is an economist, and he um, he 409 00:25:15,359 --> 00:25:18,760 Speaker 1: won't call it trickle down economics because he thinks it 410 00:25:18,920 --> 00:25:26,080 Speaker 1: literally benefits the workers immediately and first because in the 411 00:25:26,119 --> 00:25:29,600 Speaker 1: idealized version, they're gonna reinvest in. The very first thing 412 00:25:29,600 --> 00:25:32,240 Speaker 1: that's gonna happen is they're gonna put people to work 413 00:25:32,400 --> 00:25:37,000 Speaker 1: and people are gonna have jobs. Uh so, yeah, you won't. 414 00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:39,240 Speaker 1: He's not gonna call it trickle down theory because he 415 00:25:39,240 --> 00:25:41,480 Speaker 1: thinks it works literally the opposite way. Now. He I 416 00:25:41,520 --> 00:25:44,359 Speaker 1: read a column in the National Review by him, and 417 00:25:44,400 --> 00:25:49,199 Speaker 1: he's like, you will never find a legitimate economist, um, 418 00:25:49,480 --> 00:25:53,600 Speaker 1: a history of economic theories and policies and analysis. You'll 419 00:25:53,640 --> 00:25:57,119 Speaker 1: never find trickle down economics anywhere. Like it drives him 420 00:25:57,200 --> 00:25:59,600 Speaker 1: crazy that people call it that because it has such 421 00:25:59,600 --> 00:26:04,840 Speaker 1: a um a negative association, an elitist wealthy association. Yeah. 422 00:26:04,960 --> 00:26:07,160 Speaker 1: And you know when you if you're during election time 423 00:26:07,240 --> 00:26:09,840 Speaker 1: or during if you see these big tax cuts for 424 00:26:09,880 --> 00:26:12,840 Speaker 1: the wealthy, if it makes your blood boil because you 425 00:26:12,880 --> 00:26:14,640 Speaker 1: think they are these people are obviously in the hip 426 00:26:14,640 --> 00:26:17,840 Speaker 1: pocket of the politician. That may be true, but you 427 00:26:17,880 --> 00:26:20,920 Speaker 1: can still remove yourself from that and look at the 428 00:26:20,920 --> 00:26:23,760 Speaker 1: theory itself and does it work or does it not? 429 00:26:24,280 --> 00:26:42,200 Speaker 1: And we will do that after this message. So Chuck, 430 00:26:42,280 --> 00:26:48,520 Speaker 1: let's let's do just that, um passionless run down of 431 00:26:49,320 --> 00:26:54,040 Speaker 1: how it trickled down supply side tax policy works. Yeah. 432 00:26:54,080 --> 00:26:56,160 Speaker 1: I mean, it's got to be passionless with me, because 433 00:26:56,160 --> 00:26:59,600 Speaker 1: I have no idea. I like, I can't argue hard 434 00:26:59,640 --> 00:27:03,480 Speaker 1: for any side because I read so many articles disputing 435 00:27:03,480 --> 00:27:07,240 Speaker 1: one another completely that I have no idea. So okay, 436 00:27:07,280 --> 00:27:10,919 Speaker 1: so you're we're in a recession and there's a discussion 437 00:27:11,440 --> 00:27:14,880 Speaker 1: is it supply or demand that you want to stimulate? Well, 438 00:27:15,359 --> 00:27:19,640 Speaker 1: with supply side economics, trickle down is what you call 439 00:27:19,680 --> 00:27:23,920 Speaker 1: it in the vernacular. You want to stimulate the supply 440 00:27:24,960 --> 00:27:29,280 Speaker 1: because under this belief, if you stimulate the supply, them 441 00:27:30,080 --> 00:27:34,600 Speaker 1: the people who are producing stuff will have stuff for 442 00:27:34,600 --> 00:27:39,280 Speaker 1: sale and people will buy it, and more money will 443 00:27:39,440 --> 00:27:42,200 Speaker 1: enter the economy and things will get back to normal, 444 00:27:43,040 --> 00:27:48,440 Speaker 1: because the basis of this is that people still work 445 00:27:48,560 --> 00:27:53,639 Speaker 1: during recessions, and since they're working, they have money to 446 00:27:53,680 --> 00:27:57,720 Speaker 1: buy things. Not everybody's working, But you can handle the 447 00:27:57,760 --> 00:28:01,600 Speaker 1: idea that not everybody's working by getting production going again, 448 00:28:01,640 --> 00:28:04,800 Speaker 1: because that creates jobs and that in turn generates even 449 00:28:04,800 --> 00:28:08,360 Speaker 1: more income. It's passionless. So how do you do that? 450 00:28:09,280 --> 00:28:14,600 Speaker 1: According to trickle down supply side tax policy, you cut 451 00:28:14,680 --> 00:28:19,200 Speaker 1: the tax rates of the wealthiest people. You incentivize them 452 00:28:19,240 --> 00:28:21,960 Speaker 1: to keep working harder and harder because they get to 453 00:28:22,040 --> 00:28:25,359 Speaker 1: keep more and more of it themselves on the hope 454 00:28:26,080 --> 00:28:31,560 Speaker 1: that rather than keeping it themselves hoarding, they will inject 455 00:28:31,600 --> 00:28:37,320 Speaker 1: it into the economy through things like investing, expanding their businesses, 456 00:28:38,040 --> 00:28:42,120 Speaker 1: hiring more people, opening new businesses, and taking that investment 457 00:28:42,120 --> 00:28:47,000 Speaker 1: and making more money themselves. But in the meantime spreading 458 00:28:47,000 --> 00:28:52,000 Speaker 1: the wealth around through things like wages and tax revenues 459 00:28:52,000 --> 00:28:57,920 Speaker 1: through minimum wages. So that is supply side tax policy, 460 00:28:59,040 --> 00:29:01,600 Speaker 1: and why where it works or not, the jury is 461 00:29:01,600 --> 00:29:06,920 Speaker 1: still out. I did find something from um fair Economy 462 00:29:06,960 --> 00:29:09,520 Speaker 1: dot Org, which I have to say, I don't know 463 00:29:10,600 --> 00:29:14,880 Speaker 1: whether they're nonpartisan or liberal. They definitely didn't strike me 464 00:29:14,920 --> 00:29:19,040 Speaker 1: as conservative, but um, so take it however you want. 465 00:29:19,600 --> 00:29:24,800 Speaker 1: But they took the UM tax rates, the top tax 466 00:29:24,920 --> 00:29:28,760 Speaker 1: rate and it's changes from nineteen fifty four to two 467 00:29:28,800 --> 00:29:32,080 Speaker 1: thousand two, and they took the changes to that tops 468 00:29:32,160 --> 00:29:35,760 Speaker 1: tech top tax rate, the highest tier, which is the 469 00:29:35,800 --> 00:29:38,600 Speaker 1: one you're supposed to cut under this this type of 470 00:29:38,640 --> 00:29:44,080 Speaker 1: text policy, and they juxtaposed it against four different economic indicators, 471 00:29:44,880 --> 00:29:47,640 Speaker 1: growth in the gross domestic product, which is kind of 472 00:29:47,640 --> 00:29:51,120 Speaker 1: like the indicator of the overall health of the economy, UH, 473 00:29:51,160 --> 00:29:54,520 Speaker 1: income growth rate, which is, you know, how the average 474 00:29:54,520 --> 00:30:01,400 Speaker 1: Americans wealth grows, UM, I think, changes to employment, and 475 00:30:01,480 --> 00:30:04,920 Speaker 1: the growth of the hourly wage. And they found that 476 00:30:04,960 --> 00:30:10,760 Speaker 1: the correlation was basically statistically non existent. That when you 477 00:30:11,280 --> 00:30:15,600 Speaker 1: lower tax rates or raise tax rates, but specifically in 478 00:30:15,600 --> 00:30:18,600 Speaker 1: this case, when you lower the highest tax rate, it 479 00:30:18,680 --> 00:30:23,560 Speaker 1: does nothing to improve the GDP, to improve hourly wages, 480 00:30:23,640 --> 00:30:29,680 Speaker 1: to improve median wealth, um. Just just statistically speaking, over 481 00:30:29,720 --> 00:30:34,480 Speaker 1: the course of the two lowering the tax rates did 482 00:30:34,760 --> 00:30:39,040 Speaker 1: nothing for those things. So speaking from that, and you 483 00:30:39,080 --> 00:30:42,360 Speaker 1: can say, well, it doesn't really do anything Yeah. Well, 484 00:30:42,400 --> 00:30:45,600 Speaker 1: with with Reaganomics, I think, well again, I say, most 485 00:30:45,640 --> 00:30:50,560 Speaker 1: people agree, but no one agrees. Uh, it did help inflation, 486 00:30:51,200 --> 00:30:54,000 Speaker 1: if he was it was because of his policies, but 487 00:30:54,360 --> 00:30:59,160 Speaker 1: tax revenues didn't seem much change at all under those policies. Uh, 488 00:30:59,360 --> 00:31:03,640 Speaker 1: we're not even into you know, the part of Reaganomics 489 00:31:03,720 --> 00:31:06,800 Speaker 1: where he kind of shut down trade with a lot 490 00:31:06,800 --> 00:31:10,240 Speaker 1: of countries, keep it in house and the effect that had. 491 00:31:10,360 --> 00:31:14,800 Speaker 1: And I I've gotten varying answers on how long after 492 00:31:14,920 --> 00:31:18,600 Speaker 1: presidency can you even look back and with a good 493 00:31:18,680 --> 00:31:22,640 Speaker 1: judgment um of like the policies really take effect ten 494 00:31:22,680 --> 00:31:24,600 Speaker 1: years later when you're gonna see or no, it's more 495 00:31:24,640 --> 00:31:26,720 Speaker 1: like twenty years or no, you can see it immediately 496 00:31:26,840 --> 00:31:30,480 Speaker 1: with short term fixes. So it's the whole thing is 497 00:31:30,560 --> 00:31:34,880 Speaker 1: very frustrating because no one agrees. Everyone thinks they're right. Yeah, 498 00:31:34,920 --> 00:31:37,320 Speaker 1: that's the frustrating part is everybody thinks they're right. Like 499 00:31:37,360 --> 00:31:41,840 Speaker 1: Obama's policies are almost virtually the exact opposite of Reagan's. Well, 500 00:31:42,080 --> 00:31:45,000 Speaker 1: that's funny you say that, because that's not necessarily true. 501 00:31:45,280 --> 00:31:47,760 Speaker 1: He a lot of ways they are. Well, he in 502 00:31:47,920 --> 00:31:53,200 Speaker 1: that he kept the Bush era tax cuts going he's actually, well, 503 00:31:53,200 --> 00:31:56,600 Speaker 1: that's true, kept lower um tax rates than Reagan did. 504 00:31:57,200 --> 00:32:02,200 Speaker 1: And Reagan's always pegged with the trickle down economic theory, right, 505 00:32:02,920 --> 00:32:06,320 Speaker 1: Obama's got this other one going. It's called quantitative easing. 506 00:32:07,160 --> 00:32:10,600 Speaker 1: So with Reagan it was trickled down tax policy. Under 507 00:32:10,640 --> 00:32:16,480 Speaker 1: Obama it's trickled down monetary policy, and by pumping money 508 00:32:16,520 --> 00:32:21,720 Speaker 1: into the markets through the FED, it's actually helping because 509 00:32:21,760 --> 00:32:27,640 Speaker 1: of this income inequality. It's helping the wealthiest Americans by 510 00:32:27,720 --> 00:32:32,920 Speaker 1: far without anything trickling down really to the um lower, 511 00:32:32,920 --> 00:32:36,720 Speaker 1: working in middle class Americans. So trickle down policy doesn't 512 00:32:36,760 --> 00:32:41,080 Speaker 1: necessarily just mean tax policy. You can also mean monetary policy. 513 00:32:41,160 --> 00:32:46,360 Speaker 1: And we've got a very specific trickle down policy being 514 00:32:46,400 --> 00:32:50,680 Speaker 1: carried out under Obama's entire two terms so far through 515 00:32:50,760 --> 00:32:55,680 Speaker 1: quantitative easing. Either way, there's a vast transfer of wealth 516 00:32:55,720 --> 00:32:59,040 Speaker 1: going on right now, just as there was in the eighties. Yeah, 517 00:32:59,080 --> 00:33:01,680 Speaker 1: I suggest people it up on their own if they 518 00:33:02,760 --> 00:33:04,920 Speaker 1: want to jump in this argument. This one kind of 519 00:33:04,960 --> 00:33:08,600 Speaker 1: also once you really start looking into it, especially if 520 00:33:08,600 --> 00:33:14,280 Speaker 1: you go beyond like what helps and really step back 521 00:33:14,320 --> 00:33:17,360 Speaker 1: and look at what's being done and the effects of it. 522 00:33:17,600 --> 00:33:20,960 Speaker 1: Forget you know, well, my idea is the best way 523 00:33:21,000 --> 00:33:24,600 Speaker 1: to to cure recession Theoretically, like if you if you 524 00:33:24,680 --> 00:33:27,000 Speaker 1: just get out of that mindset and you look at 525 00:33:27,040 --> 00:33:30,920 Speaker 1: economic policies and you look at them through the lens 526 00:33:30,960 --> 00:33:37,160 Speaker 1: of income inequality, then suddenly conservative and liberal and Democrat 527 00:33:37,200 --> 00:33:40,680 Speaker 1: and Republican all just kind of fade away, and basically 528 00:33:40,720 --> 00:33:44,360 Speaker 1: everybody has reason to feel like they're being talked out 529 00:33:44,360 --> 00:33:47,320 Speaker 1: of something very valuable. Yeah, I came up with an idea. 530 00:33:47,320 --> 00:33:48,959 Speaker 1: I'm sure I'm not the first person to come up 531 00:33:48,960 --> 00:33:53,280 Speaker 1: with it. Uh, Josh and Amix, I wonder if if 532 00:33:53,320 --> 00:33:57,200 Speaker 1: you did cut down on the tax rates for the 533 00:33:57,240 --> 00:34:00,239 Speaker 1: wealthy to to about where they are now. This this 534 00:34:00,280 --> 00:34:03,960 Speaker 1: is like bargain basement tax rates. Frankly, it used to 535 00:34:04,000 --> 00:34:08,000 Speaker 1: be at in the sixties ninety was the highest. Now 536 00:34:08,040 --> 00:34:11,839 Speaker 1: it's thirty five under Reagan. Much of the world pays 537 00:34:11,840 --> 00:34:14,160 Speaker 1: a lot more taxes than we do. Oh yeah, so 538 00:34:15,280 --> 00:34:18,520 Speaker 1: I think it is fair for everybody. You to say 539 00:34:18,520 --> 00:34:21,759 Speaker 1: the least, if not unfair because it's so low, but 540 00:34:21,840 --> 00:34:26,040 Speaker 1: let's say that it's fair. You keep the tax rates 541 00:34:26,719 --> 00:34:29,839 Speaker 1: low on the wealthiest earners and you let them build 542 00:34:29,920 --> 00:34:32,480 Speaker 1: up as much money as they want in their lifetime, 543 00:34:32,920 --> 00:34:36,680 Speaker 1: but when they die, you tax their estate like there 544 00:34:36,800 --> 00:34:40,799 Speaker 1: is no tomorrow. And I wonder, first of all, you 545 00:34:40,880 --> 00:34:46,120 Speaker 1: increased revenue, but you also prevent dynasties. Uh, you want 546 00:34:46,120 --> 00:34:49,160 Speaker 1: to prevent dynasties. Sure. I read an article about how 547 00:34:49,360 --> 00:34:55,439 Speaker 1: UM the those who inherit wealth tend to invest it less. 548 00:34:55,480 --> 00:34:57,759 Speaker 1: They tend to hoard it more because they didn't have 549 00:34:57,800 --> 00:35:01,160 Speaker 1: any means of accumulating wealth other in a windfall. I 550 00:35:01,200 --> 00:35:04,759 Speaker 1: think if you just look at it statistically speaking, and 551 00:35:04,880 --> 00:35:07,840 Speaker 1: you look at rather than again on an individual basis, 552 00:35:07,840 --> 00:35:12,400 Speaker 1: if you look overall, when wealth is inherited rather than earned, 553 00:35:13,040 --> 00:35:16,960 Speaker 1: the inherited wealth is less often invested in ways like 554 00:35:17,160 --> 00:35:22,120 Speaker 1: um that create new jobs then the wealth that's earned. 555 00:35:22,600 --> 00:35:24,360 Speaker 1: And it's the same thing like if you won the 556 00:35:24,400 --> 00:35:27,440 Speaker 1: lottery or something like that. You should be terrified of 557 00:35:27,480 --> 00:35:29,960 Speaker 1: losing that money because you didn't do anything to earn it. 558 00:35:30,040 --> 00:35:33,080 Speaker 1: So there's no guarantee whatsoever that you will ever earn 559 00:35:33,160 --> 00:35:35,400 Speaker 1: that money or have that money again once you spend it. 560 00:35:35,800 --> 00:35:39,879 Speaker 1: If you amass a fortune in industry and lose it, 561 00:35:40,239 --> 00:35:42,839 Speaker 1: you did it once, there's a likelihood that you could 562 00:35:42,840 --> 00:35:45,959 Speaker 1: go do it again, but you're more likely to take 563 00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:48,919 Speaker 1: more risks with that wealth, but people work to take 564 00:35:48,920 --> 00:35:51,120 Speaker 1: care of their families for generations to come, like that's 565 00:35:51,160 --> 00:35:53,400 Speaker 1: what their goal is, right. So let's say you have 566 00:35:53,480 --> 00:35:58,680 Speaker 1: a hundred million dollars state and you have one kid, 567 00:35:59,200 --> 00:36:04,920 Speaker 1: and your state is taxed at when you die, your 568 00:36:05,000 --> 00:36:11,120 Speaker 1: kids still gets ten million dollars. If your kid inherited 569 00:36:11,120 --> 00:36:14,399 Speaker 1: ten million dollars, you're a wealthy person and your kid 570 00:36:14,440 --> 00:36:16,960 Speaker 1: inherits ten million dollars. I think you can get your 571 00:36:17,520 --> 00:36:22,399 Speaker 1: eternal rest easy knowing that your kid's gonna be okay 572 00:36:22,480 --> 00:36:24,360 Speaker 1: with the ten million bucks for the rest of his 573 00:36:24,480 --> 00:36:28,279 Speaker 1: or her life. I think that's fair. That's enough to 574 00:36:28,280 --> 00:36:30,319 Speaker 1: set them up in business for sure. That's enough of 575 00:36:30,320 --> 00:36:34,399 Speaker 1: a leg up that most people don't have. I uh, 576 00:36:34,640 --> 00:36:36,399 Speaker 1: that's fine. You don't have to agree with me. Yeah, 577 00:36:36,520 --> 00:36:38,600 Speaker 1: I think it's I think it's like when I hear 578 00:36:38,600 --> 00:36:41,680 Speaker 1: about Bill Gates is only gonna leave his kids so 579 00:36:41,760 --> 00:36:44,399 Speaker 1: much money or whoever was it Bill Gates or Warm 580 00:36:44,400 --> 00:36:47,440 Speaker 1: Buffet or someone they both are, they pledged like a 581 00:36:47,480 --> 00:36:51,680 Speaker 1: significant amount of their their estates right to not get leave. 582 00:36:51,680 --> 00:36:54,000 Speaker 1: It just lead that to their children. I think that's 583 00:36:54,120 --> 00:36:55,960 Speaker 1: that's great, But I think that's like it should be 584 00:36:55,960 --> 00:36:58,640 Speaker 1: a person's choice and the government shouldn't make that decision 585 00:36:58,640 --> 00:37:01,920 Speaker 1: for them. Like government making decisions like that just that 586 00:37:01,960 --> 00:37:05,279 Speaker 1: makes my blood boil. But that's tax policy, man, Like 587 00:37:05,320 --> 00:37:08,080 Speaker 1: they can make that decision while you're alive or when 588 00:37:08,120 --> 00:37:12,279 Speaker 1: you die. It's still there your income being taxed. In 589 00:37:12,320 --> 00:37:14,600 Speaker 1: the other way, it's like are they taxing your inheritance 590 00:37:14,640 --> 00:37:18,760 Speaker 1: before your death or well, But it isn't tax policy 591 00:37:18,800 --> 00:37:21,759 Speaker 1: because josh An nomics isn't. No. But the very fact 592 00:37:21,760 --> 00:37:24,600 Speaker 1: that there are taxes and then it's progressive means that 593 00:37:24,640 --> 00:37:28,160 Speaker 1: the wealthiest people pay more. The more you learn, the 594 00:37:28,200 --> 00:37:31,520 Speaker 1: more tax you pay. So why does it matter whether 595 00:37:31,560 --> 00:37:35,360 Speaker 1: it's now or when it's when you die? And I 596 00:37:35,520 --> 00:37:38,319 Speaker 1: that's not an entirely that's kind of a globe interpretation 597 00:37:38,320 --> 00:37:41,160 Speaker 1: because I realize what I'm saying is normal taxes now 598 00:37:41,360 --> 00:37:43,920 Speaker 1: and then a heavy tax when you die to prevent 599 00:37:44,120 --> 00:37:47,560 Speaker 1: dynasties and to increase revenue. I just don't think it 600 00:37:47,560 --> 00:37:50,840 Speaker 1: will disincentivize work because I think while you're alive, you 601 00:37:50,880 --> 00:37:54,359 Speaker 1: still want to make money. People's those the people who 602 00:37:54,360 --> 00:37:58,400 Speaker 1: are dedicated to amassing hundreds of millions or billions of 603 00:37:58,440 --> 00:38:01,839 Speaker 1: dollars that's not going to prevent them from making money 604 00:38:01,880 --> 00:38:04,680 Speaker 1: while they're alive. It's not you don't think they're still 605 00:38:04,719 --> 00:38:08,360 Speaker 1: alive and their kids still get a slice of the pie. 606 00:38:09,480 --> 00:38:12,000 Speaker 1: But what about their kids kids and their kids kids. Well, 607 00:38:12,080 --> 00:38:14,440 Speaker 1: then it's up to their kid to go out and 608 00:38:14,520 --> 00:38:17,240 Speaker 1: through his own effort or her own effort, yeah, amass 609 00:38:17,280 --> 00:38:21,520 Speaker 1: their own fortune just like everybody else's. Everybody gets to 610 00:38:21,560 --> 00:38:24,799 Speaker 1: start at zero, although those rich kids still get that 611 00:38:24,920 --> 00:38:29,040 Speaker 1: leg up of ten percent of the estate. It's it's 612 00:38:29,080 --> 00:38:31,640 Speaker 1: just my idea. I got your Josh and omics, Josh 613 00:38:32,000 --> 00:38:34,640 Speaker 1: ms Man, we're gonna get some letters for that one. 614 00:38:35,840 --> 00:38:39,520 Speaker 1: You got anything else? Uh? And hey, let me say that, like, 615 00:38:39,600 --> 00:38:41,839 Speaker 1: I think people should be able to live much more 616 00:38:41,920 --> 00:38:45,480 Speaker 1: meagerly than they do. I'm not a proponent of people 617 00:38:45,719 --> 00:38:49,400 Speaker 1: leading these lavish, wasteful lifestyles, but I think if you 618 00:38:49,440 --> 00:38:51,480 Speaker 1: know you've made your money in a legitimate way, then 619 00:38:51,520 --> 00:38:56,359 Speaker 1: that's your right to do so. I guess you know, yeah, 620 00:38:56,640 --> 00:38:58,520 Speaker 1: I wouldn't want some government putting their hand in my 621 00:38:58,560 --> 00:39:00,680 Speaker 1: pocket and saying, hey, you worked really hard for all that, 622 00:39:00,800 --> 00:39:04,799 Speaker 1: give me it. Well, I mean, who does Nobody wants that? 623 00:39:05,760 --> 00:39:09,600 Speaker 1: Especially when you when you look at government wastefulness or 624 00:39:09,640 --> 00:39:12,680 Speaker 1: if you don't want a fund war or something like that, like, 625 00:39:12,719 --> 00:39:15,239 Speaker 1: then it makes it even harder to bite. The whole 626 00:39:15,280 --> 00:39:17,719 Speaker 1: thing makes me want to drop out and move to 627 00:39:17,800 --> 00:39:21,840 Speaker 1: an island or someplace in the woods, very quiet, to 628 00:39:21,880 --> 00:39:24,799 Speaker 1: where I don't have to even think about any of 629 00:39:24,800 --> 00:39:26,880 Speaker 1: this stuff. I got my little garden and got my 630 00:39:26,960 --> 00:39:28,799 Speaker 1: chickens and my goats. You need to go make some 631 00:39:28,840 --> 00:39:32,560 Speaker 1: money so you can do that. Yeah, I want just 632 00:39:32,600 --> 00:39:40,240 Speaker 1: a little nine bedroom house on like with the staff. Yeah, 633 00:39:40,280 --> 00:39:42,560 Speaker 1: all right, are we done with this? We're done with 634 00:39:42,600 --> 00:39:45,759 Speaker 1: trickle down economics. If you want to learn more about it, 635 00:39:45,800 --> 00:39:48,880 Speaker 1: you can read this article on how stuff works dot com. 636 00:39:48,960 --> 00:39:52,239 Speaker 1: Just type trickle down economics into the search bar. And 637 00:39:52,320 --> 00:39:56,520 Speaker 1: since I said search bar's time for listener mail, I'm 638 00:39:56,520 --> 00:40:01,200 Speaker 1: gonna call this one. The waiting is the hardest part. Hey, guys, 639 00:40:01,239 --> 00:40:03,080 Speaker 1: just found your podcast a few months ago and I 640 00:40:03,120 --> 00:40:07,520 Speaker 1: love it. Um. The reason I'm thanking you is because 641 00:40:07,560 --> 00:40:09,319 Speaker 1: I have a bit of a worrying problem. I just 642 00:40:09,400 --> 00:40:12,120 Speaker 1: sent out my application to dental school and now I'm 643 00:40:12,120 --> 00:40:15,600 Speaker 1: playing the waiting game. Through my waiting, I always find 644 00:40:15,600 --> 00:40:18,000 Speaker 1: myself worrying and wondering what could happen, even though I 645 00:40:18,040 --> 00:40:19,840 Speaker 1: know it's not the best thing for me. Through my 646 00:40:19,880 --> 00:40:22,080 Speaker 1: long days at work this summer, listening to you guys 647 00:40:22,080 --> 00:40:24,759 Speaker 1: really helps me, uh not only take my mind off 648 00:40:24,760 --> 00:40:28,280 Speaker 1: the process, but helps take the bite off my worrying 649 00:40:28,320 --> 00:40:31,600 Speaker 1: mind and even makes me laugh out loud while people 650 00:40:31,640 --> 00:40:34,759 Speaker 1: look at me like I'm on crack, which, by the way, 651 00:40:34,800 --> 00:40:37,080 Speaker 1: I know all about through your crack podcast. That was 652 00:40:37,120 --> 00:40:39,400 Speaker 1: a good one. Um. So thanks for what you do. 653 00:40:39,480 --> 00:40:42,880 Speaker 1: You're informative and your humorous podcast makes my day easier, 654 00:40:43,239 --> 00:40:45,640 Speaker 1: helps me through the waiting game, and teaches me so 655 00:40:45,719 --> 00:40:48,440 Speaker 1: much about what I do not know. By the way, 656 00:40:48,440 --> 00:40:50,160 Speaker 1: I know it's a long shot, but if by any 657 00:40:50,239 --> 00:40:53,200 Speaker 1: chance you read this on listener mail, please give a 658 00:40:53,200 --> 00:40:56,440 Speaker 1: shout out to my fiance Elizabeth. We have less than 659 00:40:56,440 --> 00:40:59,680 Speaker 1: a year before a big day. And that is from 660 00:40:59,760 --> 00:41:04,560 Speaker 1: Kay of Davis Indicator. I n is that Indiana? Yes? 661 00:41:05,400 --> 00:41:08,160 Speaker 1: So Caleb was just making sure there wasn't some new 662 00:41:08,239 --> 00:41:11,839 Speaker 1: state I didn't know about Indo Ho. Yes, um so 663 00:41:12,000 --> 00:41:17,400 Speaker 1: Caleb and Elizabeth from Indo HO. Congratulations and Caleb, I 664 00:41:17,440 --> 00:41:19,759 Speaker 1: hope you get into a dental school. My friend, Uh 665 00:41:19,960 --> 00:41:22,640 Speaker 1: follow up with us, does it? Caleb bright Ess frequently. 666 00:41:22,719 --> 00:41:25,120 Speaker 1: Is that the Caleb I'm thinking of? No, that is 667 00:41:25,160 --> 00:41:27,640 Speaker 1: not you're thinking of the Caleb that won our contest 668 00:41:27,719 --> 00:41:30,600 Speaker 1: and at lunch with us? Is that the same Caleb 669 00:41:30,640 --> 00:41:33,640 Speaker 1: that writes us sometimes follows us on Twitter? Yeah? I 670 00:41:33,640 --> 00:41:36,920 Speaker 1: think so? Oh hey, what's well? We're gonna say uslast night? 671 00:41:36,920 --> 00:41:39,920 Speaker 1: I don't remember well at any rate. Thanks to all 672 00:41:39,960 --> 00:41:43,880 Speaker 1: the Caleb's out there who listen, We appreciate you. All right. Uh, 673 00:41:44,000 --> 00:41:46,600 Speaker 1: if you're named Caleb, or even if you're not, and 674 00:41:46,680 --> 00:41:47,960 Speaker 1: you want to get in touch of this, you can 675 00:41:48,000 --> 00:41:50,440 Speaker 1: tweet to us at s y s K podcast. You 676 00:41:50,480 --> 00:41:53,319 Speaker 1: can join us on our Facebook page. It's Facebook dot 677 00:41:53,320 --> 00:41:55,799 Speaker 1: com slash stuff you Should Know. You can send us 678 00:41:55,800 --> 00:41:58,520 Speaker 1: an email to Stuff Podcast at how stuff Works dot 679 00:41:58,600 --> 00:42:01,040 Speaker 1: com and join us that are home on the web 680 00:42:01,320 --> 00:42:09,399 Speaker 1: the beautiful Stuff you Should Know dot com. For more 681 00:42:09,440 --> 00:42:12,080 Speaker 1: on this and thousands of other topics, visit how stuff 682 00:42:12,080 --> 00:42:20,200 Speaker 1: Works dot com.