By The Associated Press February 28, 2019 — By now, everyone has heard of trickle-down economics.
If you’ve read the latest economic news or watched the recent economic debates, you know what it is: the idea that the U.S. economy will become more efficient and productive if people spend more of their income on necessities and less on luxuries.
It’s not a new idea, either, but economists have been making it a bit more mainstream for a while.
Now, the idea is gaining currency in some of the biggest economic debates of the day: The Federal Reserve is considering raising interest rates, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down more than 5 percent in a day.
And a new book is calling trickle-up economics a myth.
How did trickle-ups get so popular?
Let’s take a look.
The theory The idea of trickledown economics is actually fairly simple: If we get more people to spend less on necessities, then the economy will get more efficient.
The idea is that if people put money in their pocket and spend it, then businesses will produce more goods and services.
That’s why economists often call this the “invisible hand” effect: People put more money into their pocket to get more goods or services.
But economists aren’t always clear what happens when they add up the money that people spend on necessities.
The most popular explanation is that people will spend more on necessities if they’re not constrained by spending restrictions like credit card fees.
In the U, it’s called the “tax loophole.”
In Europe, it is called the surtax.
In China, it isn’t called the subsidy.
The biggest problem with the tax loophole is that it’s been around for more than a century.
But the idea has been gaining traction for a little while.
In fact, many economists believe it’s actually been around longer.
For instance, economists at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business in the 1960s and 1970s argued that the government could increase the supply of necessities for people by eliminating taxes on the sale of necessities.
They argued that eliminating taxes would lead to the economy growing more quickly.
And when the tax loopholes were eliminated in the 1970s, they believed that the economy would be more efficient because people would spend more.
In response to those ideas, economists started calling the idea trickle-downs, after a word that means “to reduce.”
But the term “trickle” didn’t start to gain popularity until the late 1980s, according to The Washington Post.
Then, economists began talking about the idea in more academic settings.
The term became more popular when a prominent economist from the University at Buffalo, Mark Zandi, started talking about trickle-through in economics textbooks.
He coined the term in 1991, according the New York Times.
So what’s trickle-back?
The word is usually used to describe the idea of a large increase in spending that happens as a result of an economic policy that benefits certain groups.
For example, the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hike in December 2017 is often described as “trading.”
But that’s not what it means.
It would be hard to argue that the Fed increased the supply or the demand for money by hiking rates.
What economists are saying The word trickle-out comes from a French word that literally means “through the ruse.”
So it sounds like economists are using the term to refer to a very small increase in a specific group of people who get a big boost from the policy.
And that could be true.
But when it comes to economists, economists use the term differently.
“When economists talk about trickle, they are really talking about something that happens in the economy at a certain point in time,” said David Autor, professor of economics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at the Kennedy School and an expert on the topic.
He said economists don’t use the word “trickery” when referring to the policy, because economists are trying to make it clear that their theories are based on facts and that they have not manipulated the data.
But he said the phrase could be used to refer more broadly.
“Trickle-down is really a broad umbrella term for a lot of different kinds of policies that increase the amount of spending, so that it is really easy to see what kind of effect it has,” he said.
For one thing, the phrase can refer to policies that have had little effect on the economy, like the Bush tax cuts and the stimulus package.
“The real question is whether it has been a positive or a negative effect,” Autor said.
What happens if we have a negative policy?
Some economists say there is no evidence that trickle-outs actually work.
But others argue that it could happen.
In a paper published in the journal Nature Economics, economists from Columbia University in the U., Princeton University and the University, Oxford, analyzed a large data set of federal tax filings from 2003 to 2018.
They found that about