So, Frank begins by criticizing "trickle down economics" (a popular term in the 1980's when Ronald Reagan was President), basically the term for supply-side economics. He challenges the claims made by the supply-siders by citing evidence that Japanese work more than their American counterparts and that even though real wages have gone up, people are working less. He also challenges the Republican notion that lowering taxes on businesses will lead to more hiring. His main point is that, "We have no persuasive reasons to believe that higher taxes on top earners would inhibit economic growth." Moreover, lower tax rates on top earners can actually stunt growth.
While I understand his logic that raising taxes on top earners will dissuade people from purusing winner-take-all types of jobs (i.e., portfolio managers), why should government redirect people? I don't see an ethical justification for this. And as far as his blame for the recession of 2008, he needs to look at government and Fed policies...in other words, Frank needs to study the Austrian school.
I was glad to agree with him on page 167, "...I believe that imposing higher income taxes on top earners would be a bad idea." But his insistence that taxes are not theft is not correct. Taxation is government taking from me and giving to others. However, I agree (maybe at the price of angering some of my Libertarian friends) that some taxation is necessary and legitimate for national defense and providing a court system.
Also, economist and my acquaintance David Henderson has a piece in Cato worth reading: