Posted on 12/04/2012 8:25:22 AM PST by ksen
Your reply to my post is a non sequitur. Did you intend to reply to someone else?
bump
What a country!
“Suppy Side” is not a policy, it is a description of the only approach that actually works over the long term. US Governments never manage to collect much more than 18-19% of GDP so the only question is how much government revenue do you want. When Reagan took office the government was raking in about $500B; when he left office after serious tax cuts the government was collecting $975B.
And if it’s shown that the top of the laffer curve for high income earners is 76%?
I’ve never seen anything indicating causality between the 2007-2009 Pelosi Comgress and the recession. Correlation yes, but not causation.
The recession was caused by the CRA poison pill pushed through by Dems years before and the massive over leveraging of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. There was a massive, unsustainable bubble in housing, made worse by It being the sector investors fled to when the dot com bubble popped.
The recession really had little to do, directly, with the Bush tax cuts or whatever level of supply side was in effect when the housing bubble popped. This article is just Monday morning quarterbacking by someone seeking to point fingers and push an ideological agenda.
“It’s the spending, stupid!”
If capitalism doesn’t work then how can they tax everyone so much?
Actually the people that have all those material goods are the American “Poor”!
StAn, you want to put a Variable Atlas Shrugged pointer on that? I don’t want to wait for a 100% Tax Rate before I say “Bleep it”.
*sigh*
You just said you've 'been able to find no empirical evidence that shows a statistically significant link between tax rates and GDP growth'.
Presumably had you found a cite that says Laffer +76% yields -- well you haven't revealed any supposed corresponding tax revenue yield, unless you're suggesting +76% is the apex of the Laffer curve, and I can't LOL enough at that -- so cite your cite.
“And it is true that since supply-side became ascendant the fruits of additional GDP growth have become more and more concentrated in the upper income levels.”
Concentration of capital and production facilities into fewer hands is a thoroughly predictable outcome of recessions and depressions. It never fails to occur.
The historical evidence of the 20s, 60s, 80s, and 2000s is that whatever happens to the rich, cutting their taxes is the fastest route to increase the SHARE of taxes paid by the rich. That’s why rich libs are ALWAYS in favor of increasing tax RATES, because they know the TAX REALITY and REVENUE will go down if rates go up.
_____________________________________________________________
Yep this makes perfect sense because when they pay a lower rate they expose more of their money to taxation instead of funneling it into shelters and when they use their money for investments in capital they create jobs and that means more taxpayers on the margins and less people on welfare and unemployment.
Funny how the liberals never mention JFK's 1963 tax cuts when they want to slam supply side tax cuts, or as they like to say, "trickle down economics." That's probably why Reagan used JFK as an example when he was selling his own tax cuts and economic policy.
What's the Laffer Curve have to do with GDP growth?
Presumably had you found a cite that says Laffer +76% yields -- well you haven't revealed any supposed corresponding tax revenue yield, unless you're suggesting +76% is the apex of the Laffer curve, and I can't LOL enough at that -- so cite your cite.
Just remember that you asked me to post this. ;)
The Case for a Progressive Tax: From Basic Research to Policy Recommendations
There are obviously a trillion and one different inputs into the economy, so one particular cause or another of a recession will always be hard to establish, but I don’t think it’s pure coincidence that the economy started to head south soon after the Dem’s took over Congress and as polls began to make it increasingly clear that they would soon take over the White House as well. I think business owners, investors and consumers all make decisions based on the available information about what’s coming down the pipe, and socialism is what they saw coming in 2007 and 2008.
Then maybe it’s also not a coincidence that GDP growth has slowly been declining since marginal rates have been trending down.
“innovators”
that’s a really dumb term especially when the vast majority of the wealthy got it by innovating getting born to wealthy parents.
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.