KAMALA HARRIS'S TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS.

Cynical Me had my doubts about Build Back Better, back when Dementia Joe's dementia was still a state secret.  "I'll let somebody else tackle the symbolism of subsidized trickle down good (anybody else remember Teflon and Tang) while commercial trickle down is bad, if it even exists.  In simpler terms, those chips, search engines, and circuit boards are contemporary equivalents to Falk's gears or Harnischfeger cranes or Bucyrus-Erie power shovels."  Earlier this year, while Old Joe was running unopposed in Democratic primaries, I continued to be skeptical.

Silly me.  I thought the worst thing that could happen with industrial policy was the government throwing money at losers.  "Dementia Joe is throwing money at information technology. That should bloom wherever it's planted, right?"

Sorry, no.  In last week's rant, he claimed that benefits were going to trickle down to the towns full of creatives.  "Well instead of having to import semiconductor chips, which America invented I might add, private companies are now investing billions of dollars to build new chip factories here in America!"

Alas, those investments are nowhere near as big as Dementia Joe would like.

Reason's Jack Salmon has gone beyond tackling the symbolism to running the numbers.

As the presidential race enters its final weeks, Vice President Kamala Harris is positioning herself as the champion of middle-class America, vowing to finally make the wealthy pay their fair share. Yet a closer look at her record over the past four years reveals a stark contrast between her rhetoric and reality. Far from soaking the rich, Harris' policies have funneled resources to the wealthy and corporations while burdening middle-class taxpayers.

Corporate subsidies have exploded under the Biden-Harris administration. In 2021, the 10-year budget allocation for corporate subsidies was $1.2 trillion. Three years later, it has now surpassed $2 trillion.

Well, of course they did. "Industrial policy" is just another name for rent seekers wetting their beaks.

The 2022 CHIPS and Science Act included $54 billion in corporate subsidies—Intel alone received almost $20 billion in grants and loans through the CHIPS Act. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) uncapped a slew of energy subsidies, massively expanding energy production and investment tax credits, and according to the Brookings Institution, will cost an estimated $780 billion, just in corporate welfare, by 2031.

The beneficiaries of this largesse are extremely concentrated. Three-quarters of the benefits of the IRA are shared by just 15 large corporations, seven of which are foreign. Wind turbine manufacturers like General Electric, Vestas, and Siemens/Gamesa—who collectively produce 79 percent of all turbines—are among the biggest winners. These companies also have a presence on the board of the wind energy lobby, the American Clean Power Association.

But it isn't just the corporate welfare. The IRA's consumer subsidies also disproportionately benefit the wealthy. Roughly half of the tax subsidies for electric vehicles are largely captured by big corporations (Tesla, Ford Motor Co., General Motors), while almost four-fifths of taxpayers claiming these credits earn over $100,000 a year.

And now the Democrats hope to foster the creation of inefficient small businesses with those "opportunity loans" the vice president touted in last night's debate.  Well, every other upscale constituency gets a slab of pork, why not?

This administration has consistently pushed policies that favor higher-income Americans over lower- and middle-income Americans. The extended pause on student loan payments, which lasted until late 2022, primarily aided graduates who are lawyers and physicians—who make an average salary of $176,000 and $264,000, respectively—while being paid for by taxpayers, many of whom chose not to go to college.

For over two years now, the Biden-Harris administration has attempted, often unconstitutionally, to forgive $10,000 in student loan debt for some of the country's wealthiest workers. According to a Federal Reserve Bank of New York study, the larger the loan forgiveness, the more likely the beneficiaries will be white and wealthy. This is hardly a progressive policy.

So it goes among the Anointed. Self-congratulation crowds out substance. "Despite Harris' rhetoric of fighting for the middle class, her policies have disproportionately benefited the wealthy and large corporations while leaving middle- and lower-income Americans behind. Far from soaking the rich, Harris' legacy has been one of feeding them."

Under those circumstances, it is not much of a surprise that the uncommitted voters align with the Republicans.  A coalition of high tech barons and venture capitalists with welfare recipients does not strike me as stable.