Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Economy
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 03-01-2018, 11:30 AM
whell's Avatar
whell whell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow View Post
How can you know where you are on this graph if neither axis has values assigned? For example, can you tell me which exact point on the X axis (what tax rate) provides for maximum revenue? If you can't, you can't logically make an argument that we are at a point on the graph where tax cuts will increase or decrease revenue.

Furthermore, if you even attempt to respond to this, you're admitting that you believe that our economy's health is based solely upon one variable (tax rates) and that monetary policy is fundamentally irrelevant (as are rule of law, corporate governance, corruption, education, worker mobility, innovation ...) Have you ever studied advanced math, statistics or economics? It sure doesn't look like it. The more you try to demonstrate your knowledge of economics, the less it appears you actually understand.
I love your attempt to set up straw dogs. You're truly unmatched on this. I also notice you sidestepped most of the content of my post and focused on a single sentence where you thought you could play "gotcha". Sorry to disappoint.

Let me ask you a question to illustrate how stupid your question is. Look at the Y axis - Revenue. What numbers SHOULD appear there? I think we can agree that the bottom of the axis is zero. But since Laffer never subscribed to your version / explanation of the theory - in other words Laffer never assumed that there was a single variable at work - he never included a value. To know what the minimum and maximum values were, he'd also have to know how much economic activity / capital formation / employment / etc. was going to be produced in any given year. No way to know that. The best the gov't can do is forecast that.

However, is it even arguable that you'll get more capital formation and conversion as the tax rate on capital gains goes down? No. In fact, you guys always WORRY about the this because "the rich" will benefit from it. If there was no positive economic impact from the reduction of taxes on capital, you wouldn't care one way or another.

Now the Y axis. Is it even arguable that as taxes on earnings approach 100%, that revenue from taxes on earnings will go down? If you think that the answer is that revenue from taxes on labor is maximized as the tax approaches 100%, then you should be the last person to suggest that others have a knowledge deficit about economics.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:22 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.