No, it isn't a fact, so don't insinuate it as such. NOTHING in economics is a fact. It is entirely based on theories that such and such will happen based on such and such happening. Your first mistake was made when you said that.
The second mistake you made was in reference to taxes. Go talk to any right person in the world, and ask them what they mean when they say the poor pay no taxes. They will say they pay 0% federal and 0% state income taxes. Oftentimes, they actually get more money back than what they paid in. This money could in essence "cover" at least a portion of the social security and medicare taxes that were paid.
The third mistake you made was in reference to demand. Yes, demand is crucial for a business. But somebody making $200,000 a year versus somebody making $20,000 a year has a lot more demand, even for essential things such as housing, food, transportation, etc. Your original argument said money in the hands of the poor does more to stimulate the economy. NO IT DOOESN'T. The first $20,000 that the wealthier person made is doing the EXACT same thing the $20,000 the poor person made. Going towards necessities. They then have a lot more money going in as well.
Lets go onto your fourth mistake. In your original argument, you immediately say that cutting government costs results in laying people off. This is how THEY choose to cut their costs. There are so many other wasted costs, it isn't even funny. They could VERY easily cut these same costs, and not lay off anybody. Matter of fact, the governments cutting costs could very easily cut twice the costs, without a doubt in my mind, and still be perfectly fine off. As a 19 year old, I can GUARANTEE you I could go into any government entity and find so much money being wasted I would almost cry.
One final mistake I saw. You say that the rich just play in the "high stakes casino". You do realize if this "high stakes casino" didn't exist, a LOT of jobs would also be lost. You act as if this "high stakes casino" has absolutely nothing to do with the economy, but it is so crucial. Let this portion crash, and everybody goes down.
------------
Finally, I'm going to mention one of the FUNNIEST things yet about people who use stuff like that bible argument. Did you know that Republicans, on average, make less money, yet donate considerably more money to charities? Isn't that just hilarious? Isn't it just fricking hilarious that somehow we are the selfish bastards that don't help anybody out?
Oh, but we don't want the government to help out the poor? Did you ever think that has something to do with the INCREDIBLE innefficiency of anything run by the government? A lot more help could be provided to the poor if there were no taxes and people replaced those tax expenses with donations to charities, due to the much higher efficiency.
Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.
