[martin_fierro]

Sigh.

[Paladin2]

That’s what I was going to say: “it all depends on the shape of the Laffer curve and where you are currently situated on the curve.

[AmishDude]

It is amazing, isn't it, how Arthur Laffer discovers a quadratic equation and that's still too difficult a concept for economists.

You know what else economists know? How to predict unemployment:

But seriously, this author is just an imbecile who is speaking out of his lowest oriface.

[Paladin2]

I’m not sure the peak of your curve is an equilibrium point. It looks unstable to me.

[rbosque]

Laffer curve tells it all. Revenue will increase when tax rate decrease.

[noah]

The argument is BOGUS as your Laffer curve diagram indicates.
If tax rate is at point A a tax increase will increase Revenue. At “Equilibrium?” or any tax rate higher an increase in rates will DECREASE total tax Revenue. This means it’s STUPID even for Big Govt Supporters to have a rate higher than this, UNLESS they wish themselves and US ILL.
However, the objective is NOT to Maximize Government revenue but to Maximize Personal Freedom so rates should be Much Lower than “Equilibrium?”.

[Sherman Logan]

I have seen numerous people sneer at the Laffer Curve. I have never heard one of them attempt to demonstrate why it is not true.

Of course, one can claim that we are presently on the left side of the curve. If so, cutting rates will indeed result in a decrease in revenue.

I’ve also never seen any logical explanation of how to determine where we are on the curve.