https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCk2-QVqCck
Laffer explains it. The cut brings in more revenue by making the economy take off. Also there is a high tax and a low tax amount that will generate the same exact amount of revenue... so why would you choose the higher?
I’m well aware of Art Laffer and his elasticity curve. He’s counting on you not recognizing that his graph is an idealized model like all teaching aids are. You’ll notice there are no numbers attached to Laffer’s graph, because he’s never run a study to establish what they ought to be.
Laffer didn’t work for Ronald Reagan, other than being one member of an outside advisory board. He was in private practice all during the ‘80s. Larry Lindsey and Martin Anderson did work for Reagan, Lindsey being Reagan’s senior economist for tax policy.
Unlike Laffer they did have numbers to work with and they predicted that around 66% of each dollar lost through rate reduction would be recouped through economic growth. And studies run after Reaganomics went into effect verfied the accuracy of their forecast. Lindsey described one such study in The Growth Experiment and Martin Anderson relates what their program was designed to do in Revolution.
Laffer is arguably better at self promotion than economics and politics. He says that he voted twice for both Clinton and Obama. And he famously didn’t see the massive housing bubble of the Bush junior years; here is the bet that he made with Peter Schiff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYkFYdLTTw8