The secret of the laffer curve is no one knows where the maximum point is but everyone likes to pretend they do.
You can extrapolate this to apply to all of economics.
I was going to attack the headline, but it is good - because of the off chance it will induce a lefty to read it. Instead of getting echo-chamber, they will get what they are trying to avoid reading.
Anyone fuming over the headline alone - read the entire article.
Hey Mr. “Libertarian-Republican” - I have an idea.
How about we REDUCE the size of government and thereby reduce government spending. Then, the government will not need as much revenue and the “Laffer Curve” gets smaller, with “t” itself shifting to the left. Then taxes can be reduced until the new, lesser “t” is hit.
Got that? REDUCE government spending by reducing the size of the government!
THAT used to be part of the Republican economic plan also, didn’t it?
Without regulating spending to revenue, there is NO tax rate that would be enough.
See: You can’t soak the ‘rich’. WSJ.
(Hauser’s Law)
I really believe that an increase in taxation reduces my freedoms. (Especially my freedom to decide to whom to give my charitable donations. less income=less charity. I don’t get any warm feelings when giving to the government.)
The Laffer curve was a hockey-stick graph prank.
Just like the ones the global warmers use.
If the logic were true, taxes should be cut to 1% and we will all get rich!
AS for the “optimal” tax rate, the Laffer curve in no way considers it, it just assumes deficit spending is good.
Remember “we will grow out of the deficit?” That was Laffer-curve-like witch doctor stuff.
Tax cuts must be accompanied by spending cuts. Otherwise, we don’t reap the benefits.
I just saw Laffer on Bloomberg and he hit every question out of the park.
This article makes a very important point. Sometimes the GOP is too smart for its own good, the net effect of which means it's stupid.
You don't need anything to sell tax cuts except to tell people they will get to keep more of their own money and the government will still have enough to work.
Seems like you could take the current Federal rate, adjust it by the additional taxes states add, and compare that total to see which states were prospering and which were suffering. So, federal rate, plus average state rates, plus or minus difference between average state rate, (or something like that), then you know a lot more about where t is.
One of you folks who actually likes futzing around with numbers could probably come up wit a real formula that might be useful for modeling t.