Take trickle-down economics, throw in some Marie Antoinette and Julius Caesar for good measure, and my friends, I present to you the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
While you were celebrating with barbecue, drones and fireworks around the Bay (whether they were supposed to be there or not), the president signed a sprawling tax and spending bill into law. The legislation — dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — was declared a landmark economic victory. But behind the optics, the 900+ page bill tells a familiar story that gestures toward the future but conjures a well-documented past.
At its core, OBBBA draws heavily on supply-side economic theory introduced in the 1920s and current-era popularized during the Reagan administration in the 1980s. Reagan’s team argued that cutting taxes for corporations and high-income earners would stimulate investment, create jobs and eventually raise wages for all. Paired with deregulation, reduced government spending, and a rhetorical commitment to shrinking the role of the state, this approach reshaped the American economy with mixed results.
The outcomes of that era are well documented. The economy grew, but income inequality skyrocketed and middle and working-class wages stagnated. Safety nets were scaled back or eliminated entirely, the national debt ballooned, and yes, there was even the largest single-day stock market crash in 1987 as a perhaps more coincidental cherry on top. The prosperity born from 80s era Reaganomics simply did not “trickle down.”
Trump’s newly signed bill resurrects many of these same ideas. There are tax cuts where the highest earners see the largest gains, and increases in funding for immigration enforcement and military. Qualifying for medicaid and food assistance gets harder, while billions in federal funding are cut. According to the Congressional Budget Office, OBBBA will add between $2.8 and $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, with as many as 11 million Americans expected to lose health coverage or access to basic services.
Of course, we tend to return to what worked — especially when it worked for us personally. For 45, the Reagan years were not just politically important. They were the foundation of his own financial rise. The deregulation, tax shelters and real estate incentives of the 1980’s helped him build his business empire, largely through debt-leveraged expansion and favorable capital gains treatment. It makes sense that he would seek to re-create the policy landscape that enabled his ascent.
Recommended for you
But, the world in which this new version of Reaganomics is being applied is far more fragile than the one he benefited from.
Today’s economy is shaped by challenges that didn’t exist in 1981. Wages have lagged far behind housing, health care and education costs. Gig and contract labor have replaced stable employment and retirement accounts in up to one-third of the labor market. Labor force participation is lower than it was in the 1980s. Home ownership is increasingly out of reach. Public systems like child care, transit and water infrastructure are stretched thin. The country’s infrastructure is aging, and climate related disasters are growing more frequent and more costly, including the tragic flash flood in Texas over the weekend where as of the time of writing this, over 90 people have died. Events like this test our infrastructure, expose how fragile our safety nets and systems have become, and put on display how deeply unequal the consequences of underinvestment really are.
But what distinguishes this version of supply-side economics is its pairing with symbolic populist flourishes that amount to very little in the end — our cake. Trump’s bill includes handpicked and headline-ready giveaways like “Trump Accounts” that are designed to spread crumbs with a smile while feasting happens elsewhere.
At the same time, the Federal Reserve is operating with limited tools, an unpredictable administration, and an increasingly interconnected and volatile global economy. Monetary policy no longer moves in isolation. This makes public policy even more critical but in this context, a tax and spending bill that prioritizes high-income earners and corporate-friendly incentives while effectively degrading structural support to working families is akin to going all in on the hopes that a royal flush flips on the river.
And yet, it sells. Tax cuts are easy to pitch and hard to trace. Empty populist gestures don’t need to be economically meaningful to be politically powerful. This flavor of political theater isn’t new, and ancient emperors knew the value of bread and circuses. Today, however, policy that prioritizes appearance over function is just Reaganomics in a red hat tossing bits of cake to keep the crowd clapping even as the foundation underneath them cracks.
So, here we are. Not a doomsday prophecy, but rather a call to put your boots on because it will inevitably fall to the people to pick up where social programs fall short. And of course, midterm elections are just around the corner.
Annie Tsai is chief operating officer at Interact (tryinteract.com), early stage investor and advisor with The House Fund (thehouse.fund), and a member of the San Mateo County Housing and Community Development Committee. Find Annie on Twitter @meannie.
It's indisputable that money left in the private sector will better grow the economy, produce jobs, increase incomes, employment as well as increasing government tax receipts. It better enables government to supply more social services. That's because the private sector is far better at allocating capital to its highest and best use than government is. Just compare our economic outcomes to communist and socialist counties.
Capitalism has failed several 100 times already. And every time it does its government that is bailing out private companies. Only a few examples:
- great depression
- great depression
- financial system collapse
- black monday
- bank bailouts
- automobile industry bailouts
- airline bailouts
- going away from Gold
- subsidies to oil industry
- subsidies to agriculture
- subsidies to car industry
- heavy-duty Pickup trucks and SUVs (a consequence of tariffs)
- current tariff policy is basically surrender
- recent bill that increases deficit to bailout more private companies
Whenever you hear "subsidies" or "bailouts" or "tariffs" that means "capitalism" and "free markets" have failed and looking for government and tax payers to be bailout.
or in shorter - if capitalism was wining there would be no deficits and there would be no need for tariffs.
It's a democratic system that isn't run by oligarchs, aristocrats, dictators and without corruption.
It's a system that takes care of all the basic human needs of all its residents (clean air, shelter, clean water, affordable food, free education, free or at least solid healthcare, free or cheap public transportation, culture and entertainment options). Once the basic needs are met, each resident can focus on their own pursuit of happiness so to speak.
This isn't too much to ask for. The constitution of the US and other western democracies come really close, but have been hindered by campaign financing, which favors greedy companies and corrupt politicians over benevolent ones. .
(If I ever find a benevolent and decently smart one in San Mateo county, I will let you know.)
So at this point I favor calling out hypocrisies and hypocrites on the left, the right, and the middle - which is really fun and plenty.
eGerd – TBot here. It sounds more like a utopian Dream. But if your dream hasn’t been realized now, what makes you think it will ever occur? We do the best with what we have and since you’re still living in the good old US of A… But that brings up the question, other than talking the talk what are you doing to walk the walk to make a difference? And is this difference in the interest of making America great again? BTW, no world peace?
what Utopian dream - it's the US Declaration of Independence, the US constitution, the US law, basically what's sold as "The American Dream" ...
ouch, you might be right. It was always in plain sight, but "the patriots" never caught on to the fact that they didn't call it "The American Reality".
But I'm glad we agree that the current administration was never, ever going to fix anything. Fooled again by Washington DC, what else is new.
And what am I doing? Of course I'm taking my 10 grocery bags home by bicycle powered by green, renewable energy. obviously. That doesn't pollute the American water, that doesn't pollute the American air, that doesn't cost the American taxpayer immense amount of money, that doesn't require parking spaces, no subsidized fossil fuels are financing wars in Iran and Yemen on my behalf. I might even ride over to Ikea today.
Ms. Tsai - if everything prior to Trump's inauguration was so peachy, why were the Democrats booted from their thrones? I recall the onslaught of illegal migrants, high inflation and general crime proliferation for some of the reasons Trump was elected. There are also two items in your otherwise well written column. Marie Antoinette never mentioned cake. Eating it, was actually uttered by a contemporary Spanish King. Consult Antonia Fraser's The Journey, 2001. Your reference to this tax bill benefiting the ultra rich is also a cheap shot. Our three children managed to purchase $million plus homes in California by attaining professional degrees and are reaping the monetary awards thereof. They are not ultra rich but are paying through the nose for property and state taxes. Trump's tax bill is benefitting millions of Californians like them who are asset rich and cash poor. Your incessant criticism of Trump seems envious and is out of step with your otherwise educational columns.
The Democrats have been booted from their thrones because they keep "managing" poverty, equity, housing, education, healthcare, sustainability but they have shown little intention or skills to actually fix these things. The fact that San Mateo County - the second richest county in CA and top 3 in the US - doesn't have solid education (but school segregation), public transportation (aka bus lanes), active transportation (aka bike lanes), or sustainable energy production (aka wind turbines) shows that Democrats are either too dumb or devious (D or D) to get things done.
My money is on the second D. My best guess is that corruption has created this county and it has never left. Bay Area politicians are known for it and a Bay Area politician was punished at the pole. It is somewhat funny that CA corruption was beaten by NYC corruption.
Both parties like illegal immigration and illegal immigrants because it meant cheap labor for construction, farming and slaughterhouses. It means a labor force that pays into social security without ever taking anything out. But immigrants and outsiders have always been a convenient political tennis ball across history.
Thanks for your column today, Ms. Tsai. I find it interesting that folks criticize the OBBBA yet there was radio silence on the spendthrift ways of Biden and his America Last policies. How many electric car chargers were installed with the $billions in Biden’s infrastructure act? A handful? And then here in California, we have the colossal boondoggle union giveaway known as the train-to-nowhere. I don’t believe any track has been laid after what, two decades? BTW, if it weren’t for Biden’s porous border, we wouldn’t need such a large increase in funding for immigration enforcement. The OBBBA could have been the OBBA (minus the “Big”).
Meanwhile, I propose a solution… Dems who oppose the OBBBA should assume tax rates revert to their previous levels before Trump’s tax cuts and recent extension and pay those taxes to the US Treasury. Not only that, how about Dems stop taking income tax deductions and pay their corresponding tax bill? It’s time for Dems to put their boots on and pick up where they feel social programs fall short. But what are the odds of that? I’m betting that as usual, there will be plenty of talking the talk but not much, if any, walking the walk. And isn’t it now the One Big Beautiful Law (OBBL)?
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(9) comments
It's indisputable that money left in the private sector will better grow the economy, produce jobs, increase incomes, employment as well as increasing government tax receipts. It better enables government to supply more social services. That's because the private sector is far better at allocating capital to its highest and best use than government is. Just compare our economic outcomes to communist and socialist counties.
Capitalism has failed several 100 times already. And every time it does its government that is bailing out private companies. Only a few examples:
- great depression
- great depression
- financial system collapse
- black monday
- bank bailouts
- automobile industry bailouts
- airline bailouts
- going away from Gold
- subsidies to oil industry
- subsidies to agriculture
- subsidies to car industry
- heavy-duty Pickup trucks and SUVs (a consequence of tariffs)
- current tariff policy is basically surrender
- recent bill that increases deficit to bailout more private companies
Whenever you hear "subsidies" or "bailouts" or "tariffs" that means "capitalism" and "free markets" have failed and looking for government and tax payers to be bailout.
or in shorter - if capitalism was wining there would be no deficits and there would be no need for tariffs.
Hey easygerd - now that you have made clear what you are against, could you, pretty please, tell us what you are for?
Thanks for asking, Dirk.
I Have a Dream ...
It's a democratic system that isn't run by oligarchs, aristocrats, dictators and without corruption.
It's a system that takes care of all the basic human needs of all its residents (clean air, shelter, clean water, affordable food, free education, free or at least solid healthcare, free or cheap public transportation, culture and entertainment options). Once the basic needs are met, each resident can focus on their own pursuit of happiness so to speak.
This isn't too much to ask for. The constitution of the US and other western democracies come really close, but have been hindered by campaign financing, which favors greedy companies and corrupt politicians over benevolent ones. .
(If I ever find a benevolent and decently smart one in San Mateo county, I will let you know.)
So at this point I favor calling out hypocrisies and hypocrites on the left, the right, and the middle - which is really fun and plenty.
eGerd – TBot here. It sounds more like a utopian Dream. But if your dream hasn’t been realized now, what makes you think it will ever occur? We do the best with what we have and since you’re still living in the good old US of A… But that brings up the question, other than talking the talk what are you doing to walk the walk to make a difference? And is this difference in the interest of making America great again? BTW, no world peace?
what Utopian dream - it's the US Declaration of Independence, the US constitution, the US law, basically what's sold as "The American Dream" ...
ouch, you might be right. It was always in plain sight, but "the patriots" never caught on to the fact that they didn't call it "The American Reality".
But I'm glad we agree that the current administration was never, ever going to fix anything. Fooled again by Washington DC, what else is new.
And what am I doing? Of course I'm taking my 10 grocery bags home by bicycle powered by green, renewable energy. obviously. That doesn't pollute the American water, that doesn't pollute the American air, that doesn't cost the American taxpayer immense amount of money, that doesn't require parking spaces, no subsidized fossil fuels are financing wars in Iran and Yemen on my behalf. I might even ride over to Ikea today.
Ms. Tsai - if everything prior to Trump's inauguration was so peachy, why were the Democrats booted from their thrones? I recall the onslaught of illegal migrants, high inflation and general crime proliferation for some of the reasons Trump was elected. There are also two items in your otherwise well written column. Marie Antoinette never mentioned cake. Eating it, was actually uttered by a contemporary Spanish King. Consult Antonia Fraser's The Journey, 2001. Your reference to this tax bill benefiting the ultra rich is also a cheap shot. Our three children managed to purchase $million plus homes in California by attaining professional degrees and are reaping the monetary awards thereof. They are not ultra rich but are paying through the nose for property and state taxes. Trump's tax bill is benefitting millions of Californians like them who are asset rich and cash poor. Your incessant criticism of Trump seems envious and is out of step with your otherwise educational columns.
The Democrats have been booted from their thrones because they keep "managing" poverty, equity, housing, education, healthcare, sustainability but they have shown little intention or skills to actually fix these things. The fact that San Mateo County - the second richest county in CA and top 3 in the US - doesn't have solid education (but school segregation), public transportation (aka bus lanes), active transportation (aka bike lanes), or sustainable energy production (aka wind turbines) shows that Democrats are either too dumb or devious (D or D) to get things done.
My money is on the second D. My best guess is that corruption has created this county and it has never left. Bay Area politicians are known for it and a Bay Area politician was punished at the pole. It is somewhat funny that CA corruption was beaten by NYC corruption.
Both parties like illegal immigration and illegal immigrants because it meant cheap labor for construction, farming and slaughterhouses. It means a labor force that pays into social security without ever taking anything out. But immigrants and outsiders have always been a convenient political tennis ball across history.
Thanks for your column today, Ms. Tsai. I find it interesting that folks criticize the OBBBA yet there was radio silence on the spendthrift ways of Biden and his America Last policies. How many electric car chargers were installed with the $billions in Biden’s infrastructure act? A handful? And then here in California, we have the colossal boondoggle union giveaway known as the train-to-nowhere. I don’t believe any track has been laid after what, two decades? BTW, if it weren’t for Biden’s porous border, we wouldn’t need such a large increase in funding for immigration enforcement. The OBBBA could have been the OBBA (minus the “Big”).
Meanwhile, I propose a solution… Dems who oppose the OBBBA should assume tax rates revert to their previous levels before Trump’s tax cuts and recent extension and pay those taxes to the US Treasury. Not only that, how about Dems stop taking income tax deductions and pay their corresponding tax bill? It’s time for Dems to put their boots on and pick up where they feel social programs fall short. But what are the odds of that? I’m betting that as usual, there will be plenty of talking the talk but not much, if any, walking the walk. And isn’t it now the One Big Beautiful Law (OBBL)?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.