Supply-Side Economics

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

GOP shredded for still pushing discredited Reagan-era economic theory
https://www.rawstory.com/republicans-laffer-curve/

Repukes are going to push this nonsense on rubes like Whell because it still works to get votes from these idiots.

Speaking of rubes, hope you had a great Thanksgiving, Chickie.

Thanks for this article as well, because it calls out the one item that the left keeps coming back to:

Arthur Laffer, the Reagan-era guru of trickle-down economics, was unchastened by the deficit explosion back then, which effectively disproved his theory that cutting taxes on the rich would increase government tax revenue.

The Keynesians keep lying about what Supply-Side is. I've stated many times that the theory has nothing to do with government spending, but the Keynesian crowd unfailingly attempts to describe Supply-Side in terms of the deficit, which is a function of spending.

The failure, if you want to call it that, was not in the theory itself. The theory worked, and tax revenue tracked pretty much the same as a percentage of GDP from 1970 - 1990: https://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/...n_20th_Century

The ideology has a kernel of truth to it in that taxation generally reduces economic activity; however, there has never been any evidence U.S. taxes were high enough to begin with to depress economic activity beyond the returns to government revenue.

It's an irrelevant point because there's never been any agreement - at least in recent history - about the appropriate role, size, and required funding level for the US Gov't. In fact, the left likes to refer to a reduction in a percentage of budget increase for a department of the function of the Federal bureaucracy as a budget cut. So, the author might have a point, but he gets out over his skis and fails when he refers to the deficit.

Here's where the train went off the rails: https://www.usgovernmentspending.com...ecent_Spending

Spending MORE THAN DOUBLED during that period of time, yet tax revenue as a % of GDP remained flat. It was, and still is, the SPENDING that is not sustainable, which has nothing to do with Supply Side theory.