Posted on 12/09/2019 10:55:26 AM PST by karpov
WASHINGTON — Elizabeth Warren is leading a liberal rebellion against a long-held economic view that large tax increases slow economic growth, trying to upend Democratic policymaking in the way supply-side conservatives changed Republican orthodoxy four decades ago.
Generations of economists, across much of the ideological spectrum, have long held that higher taxes reduce investment, slowing economic growth. That drag, the consensus held, would offset the benefits to growth from increased government spending in areas like education.
Ms. Warren and other leading Democrats say the opposite. The senator from Massachusetts, who is a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, contends that her plans to tax the rich and spend the revenue to lift the poor and the middle class would accelerate economic growth, not impede it. Other Democratic candidates are making similar claims about their tax-and-spend proposals. Some liberal economists go further and say that simply taxing the rich would help growth no matter what the government did with the money.
Democrats in the past, including the party’s 2016 nominee, Hillary Clinton, have argued that a more modest combination of tax increases and spending programs would expand the economy. But no Democratic nominee before Ms. Warren had ever proposed so many new taxes and spending programs, and leaned so heavily into the argument that they would be, in economist parlance, pro-growth.
That argument tries to reframe a classic debate about the economic “pie” in the United States by suggesting there is no trade-off between increasing the size of the pie and dividing the slices more equitably among all Americans.
Ms. Warren has proposed nearly $3 trillion a year in new taxes on businesses and high-earners, largely focused on billionaires but sometimes hitting Americans who earn $250,000 and above per year. The taxes would fund wide-reaching new government spending
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
They want to take all of our money to protect us from it’s influences. And there are a lot of .gov types that believe that since the govt printed the money that it belongs to them in the first place.
Tax money will can speed up the local economy where taxed money is spent. But there won’t be enough money to speed up the economy every where the tax is collected.
In any way, shape or form, have the Democrats ever been right about anything?
>>>Do they have any historic examples to prove their theory? There are many of them to prove the opposite!
Bill Clinton passed the largest tax increase in American history and GDP grew fastet.
If you read the article with a Yakov Smirnoff voice and preface each insane claim with “in Soviet Russia”, you can make it to the end.
She probably shouldn’t have said that.
Similar to saying she should not have claimed to be a NA.
Well if she could play football for the WASHINGTON REDSKINS she could make the
claim. Or get signed as an office gofer.
Yes, let’s take money out of the economy, away from individuals and companies and that will help them make more money because they have less to invest and spend. Makes perfect sense to me! /s
A quick look at every high-tax Marx-O-Crat stronghold will dispel that myth right quick.
leftard worshipers of big giverment:
fantasies + emotions + wishful thinking = reality
Warren should demonstrate this stupidity as Winston Churchill opined by standing in a washtub, grabbing the handles and lifting herself.
“Hasn’t worked before”
We’ll do thee exact same thing as before, because “this time it’ll be different.” /s
The Communists will say and do ANYTHING to increase both their legalized theft, and illegal theft, of the “unwashed masses’ money to fund their vile, evil schemes.
I remember reading something - probably Dave Ramsey - that the vast majority of we Middle-Earners will have at least 1 million dollars pass through our hands during our working/earning years.
The trick is - keeping as much of it as you can!
But if you do, you’ll earn the wrath of loser Democrats who think YOUR money is THEIR money!
And, 2 + 2 = 3.
Let us start with a 200% tax on
1. Movie and TV production and sales
2. Music production and sales
3. Print news and magazines hardcopy sales
4. Google Ad Revenue by 10,000%
5. Facebook Ad Revenue by 10,000%
6. YouTube Ad Revenue by 10,000%
7. All of AMAZON items that are NOT made in the USA by 200%
Let us stimulate the economy by sharing all of the liberal wealth first.
Along with that we should remove any and all tax breaks for wind, solar or battery, and all tax breaks for Electric Cars, and any tax breaks for Amazon, Google, and Facebook. After all, they should pay their fair share right?
That is because democrats are dishonest as well as stupid.
Remember how all the tax increases helped the economy before? OH WAIT THEY DIDN’T
It was only Trump’s tax cuts and Reagan’s tax cuts that lit the economy on fire!
This is essential proof of OVER-TAXATION.
There was an analysis done by Laffer who showed this with a graph of revenue-vs-taxes.
It was pure common sense, so of course the liberals couldn’t understand it and mocked the ‘Laffer Curve’ by calling it the “Giggle Wiggle”.
I guess Warren hasn’t noticed all the people leaving high tax states for lower tax states.
Guess she missed that one.
The gov’t expenditures multiplier is always smaller than the private sector multiplier. If MPC is the Marginal Propensity to Consume (e.g., .8), then
Multiplier_gov = MPC / (1 - MPC) = .8 / .2 = 4
Mutliplier_pri = 1 / (i - MPC) = 1 / .2 = 5
Pubic expenditures grow the economy at a rate that is one less than the private spending multiplier will.
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.