Posted on 03/22/2017 12:19:35 PM PDT by Sean_Anthony
Cutting taxes isn't enough -- spending must be reduced
Many Republicans still believe that tax cuts will unleash so much new economic activity that the tax revenue from that new activity will pretty much make up for any revenue foregone by cutting taxes.
Columnist Megan McArdle notes that the GOP has been down this road before, most notably in the 1980s:
Yes, eventually. They help grow the economy, which broadens the tax base, which brings in more revenue.
It worked for Coolidge, for JFK, for Reagan, even to a lesser extend for W.
And yes, spending cuts will help too. For many reasons.
The past is the past, and it was easier before 'globalization', global wage arbitrage, mass immigration, lower national debt, automation. But, we face that going forward. Growth will be tough.
The border fence is paying for itself I’ve heard. Why shouldn’t tax cuts?
The question is whether income tax rate reduction pay for themselves and the resounding answer is yes they do. Try to keep up.
The question is about income tax rate reductions and whether they pay for themselves, the answer is yes they do.
The thread title asks the question: Do Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves?
I then said: "Show me years in which federal tax cuts were made, where tax revenues dropped substantially."
More of a statement than a question.
I already knew the answer, because I looked it up a while back, having this argument with people.
You and I are in agreement.
My last post to you: "The go-go '80's happened with comparatively high interest rates. We've already seen a bump in growth, just from "hope" in Trumps agenda. Add lower taxes AND low interest rates, and look out.
Just heard a few days ago, that DHS now says that illegal invaders have dropped 60%, from 40% just a few weeks ago. DHS' numbers WERE 700,000 invaders a year. 700k at 60%, that's 420k less invaders a year. Add to that the amount that self deport or federal deport and job numbers will explode. "
Is just an affirmation, that barring some tragedy or a market crash, we are poised to do what we did in the 80's, except this time, it will be done with much lower interest rates. The 80's were IN SPITE of high interest rates.
My thoughts are, that 1 year after Trumps inauguration, work force participation will be up 0.5%. One year later will see another full point rise. And by the 2020 election, work force participation will be at near it's former high mark.
Our population is growing at about 2 to 2-1/4 million people a year. Our current work force participation rate is 63%. The high was 67.3% in 2000. Current population is 323 million.
A 4% rise in workforce participation is 12 million more people working (Not including the natural rise in population)
Since 2010, our GDP growth rate has been between 1.5%-2.6%.
The 80's and 90's saw 3-1/2 to 4-1/2
Imagine that growth rate PLUS a President who runs a budget like a business man.
If allowed, we could actually see budget surpluses.
There are no costs to cutting taxes. Spending is the only way to incur a cost.
The Progressive Movement has been reasonably successful in leading their "useful idiots" into believing that a tax cut increases cost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.