Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: remember
The "free lunch" that I referred to is the belief that cuts in the top marginal rate in the current 30 to 40 percent range will pay for themselves.

Do you believe that Reagan's first tax cut paid for itself? Did reducing the top rate from 70% to 50% cause more revenues to come into the government's coffers? Did that reduction in taxes help the economy to grow faster and did it result in higher after tax income for America's citizens?

21 posted on 11/25/2005 7:52:39 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (The Federal Reserve did not kill JFK. Greenspan was not on the grassy knoll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: Toddsterpatriot
Do you believe that Reagan's first tax cut paid for itself? Did reducing the top rate from 70% to 50% cause more revenues to come into the government's coffers? Did that reduction in taxes help the economy to grow faster and did it result in higher after tax income for America's citizens?

Given the limitations of the Laffer curve that I listed in the previous message, I don't think there is enough historical data to answer those questions. Individual income tax revenues did drop sharply from 1982 to 1984 so they did not appear to increase in the short-term. Then the 1986 tax cut further reduced the top rate to 28% and changed the tax structure (reducing many deductions) so it's difficult to make any judgment about the medium-term.

28 posted on 11/27/2005 2:36:18 AM PST by remember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson