The entire point of a reduction in tax rates is NOT to decrease government revenue. Decreased government revenue is not the goal. Decreased share of government as a % of GDP perhaps - but not decreased revenue.
Tax rate reduction is based upon the principle that the government should take as little as a % as possible from people that is both necessary and sufficient to fulfill the duties it is entrusted to by the Constitution and legislation.
If a flat fair 20% tax rate on all income could fund the government fully - and with an expanding economy even increase revenue higher - it is a good unto itself that less people are paying 30% or more.
Do you think it is a good unto itself and a desired goal for government revenue to decrease? Is that the argument you think people here are making in favor of tax rate reductions?
“pay for them” means a tax rate increase in your language.
Tax rate increases are notorious for not actually leading to increased revenue and almost everyone agrees that raising tax rates in a down economy is a real bad move - even 0bama was saying it before “balancing” spending cuts with tax rate increases and “paying for it” via tax rate increases became the words on liberal lips.
“The entire point of a reduction in tax rates is NOT to decrease government revenue.”
You and I just aren’t going to agree. I simply can’t understand how someone could think that reducing government revenue isn’t the point of a tax cut.