Kansas supply-side, trickle-down, voodoo economics fails

[IM2]

Yet Conservatives want to do what they did in Kansas for the rest of the country. Kansas cut taxes in 2012, then saw a $900M shortfall, a couple credit downgrades, economic growth below the national average, job growth below the national average, business creation below the national average, raised tuition costs, raised excise taxes, raised co-pays and out of pocket costs for Medicaid, raided the Highway Fund, raided the welfare block grant, and had to close schools early because they didn't have money to keep them open. And they still couldn't balance their budget.

Tax cuts caused this.

/----- Kansas needs to cut spending, Einstein.
Reckless spending caused Kansas budget crisis
Brownback’s tax cuts were supposed to be the start of a new, small-government approach to growing the economy. And yet lawmakers did little to slow the growth in state spending: The state’s all-funds budget has increased by well over $1 billion since 2013.
Jeff Glendening: Reckless spending caused Kansas budget crisis

Reckless spending by activist judges played a large role.

Garbage, Almost immediately after the first cuts the state was in trouble.

Of course you know that is not true, if you actually live here. Total revenue has changed little and GDP is up.

GDP - Kansas 2010 - 2017
Gross Domestic ProductKansas 2010-2019 - State Local Data

I know its true and 2 of my friends are state reps.

 

[Wry Catcher]

yes, there was 15 threads about this last month. Thanks for keeping us informed with new information.

Only 15? How many threads on Benghazi (and how much money spent), on Solyndra, on Birtherism, on Obama's golf game, Hawaii vacations, the PPACA?

 

[The Derp]

I haven't made an argument on tax cuts, I told you the reason Kansas is having fiscal issues. Now run along and cease annoying me

They are having fiscal issued because they cut revenue. See below, SB 30 is a repeal of the 2012 Brownback Tax Cuts. Notice how suddenly the budgets are balanced after SB 30? Why is that?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Yet Conservatives want to do what they did in Kansas for the rest of the country. Kansas cut taxes in 2012, then saw a $900M shortfall, a couple credit downgrades, economic growth below the national average, job growth below the national average, business creation below the national average, raised tuition costs, raised excise taxes, raised co-pays and out of pocket costs for Medicaid, raided the Highway Fund, raided the welfare block grant, and had to close schools early because they didn't have money to keep them open. And they still couldn't balance their budget.

Tax cuts caused this.

In some cases there is no solution. If they would have raised taxes would they have gotten more economic growth? Would they have had more job growth? Would there have more business creation? The economy ebbs and flows, and in spite of all the fiscal engineering governments may try, you can not ensure continued growth and prosperity. It's the nature of economics. You might read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. It does a great job of observing the natural flow of economies.

 

[The Derp]

GDP - Kansas 2010 - 2017
Gross Domestic ProductKansas 2010-2019 - State Local Data

So what is that relative to? KS GDP growth lags its neighbors and the national average. We were promised that the tax cuts would "be a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the economy". That didn't happen.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yet Conservatives want to do what they did in Kansas for the rest of the country. Kansas cut taxes in 2012, then saw a $900M shortfall, a couple credit downgrades, economic growth below the national average, job growth below the national average, business creation below the national average, raised tuition costs, raised excise taxes, raised co-pays and out of pocket costs for Medicaid, raided the Highway Fund, raided the welfare block grant, and had to close schools early because they didn't have money to keep them open. And they still couldn't balance their budget.

Tax cuts caused this.

/----- Kansas needs to cut spending, Einstein.
Reckless spending caused Kansas budget crisis
Brownback’s tax cuts were supposed to be the start of a new, small-government approach to growing the economy. And yet lawmakers did little to slow the growth in state spending: The state’s all-funds budget has increased by well over $1 billion since 2013.
Jeff Glendening: Reckless spending caused Kansas budget crisis

Reckless spending by activist judges played a large role.

Garbage, Almost immediately after the first cuts the state was in trouble.

Of course you know that is not true, if you actually live here. Total revenue has changed little and GDP is up.

GDP - Kansas 2010 - 2017
Gross Domestic ProductKansas 2010-2019 - State Local Data

I know its true and 2 of my friends are state reps.

Explain this:

Fact check: Brownback on the Kansas economy

Gov. Sam Brownback has pushed back on criticism of his economic policies in recent weeks, citing data to support his statements.

The governor has cited information from such sources as the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in presentations to the Wichita Pachyderm Club, in newsletters to a grassroots e-mail list and in speaking with reporters. But he often paints an incomplete picture of the data.

Critics say the governor’s office selects statistics to make the state’s economy appear better than it is.

Here, The Eagle looks at three statements the governor makes about the economy.

More at the link above

 

[The Derp]

In some cases there is no solution. If they would have raised taxes would they have gotten more economic growth?

KS was ahead of the national average before the tax cuts, so they didn't even need to cut taxes. BTW - CA raised taxes in 2012 and saw job, GDP, and business growth above the national average.

Would they have had more job growth? Would there have more business creation? The economy ebbs and flows, and in spite of all the fiscal engineering governments may try, you can not ensure continued growth and prosperity. It's the nature of economics. You might read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. It does a great job of observing the natural flow of economies.

KS was doing better economically before the tax cuts than it was after them:

 

[The Derp]

But he often paints an incomplete picture of the data.

That is what Conservatives do; they cherry pick.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

In some cases there is no solution. If they would have raised taxes would they have gotten more economic growth?

KS was ahead of the national average before the tax cuts, so they didn't even need to cut taxes. BTW - CA raised taxes in 2012 and saw job, GDP, and business growth above the national average.

Would they have had more job growth? Would there have more business creation? The economy ebbs and flows, and in spite of all the fiscal engineering governments may try, you can not ensure continued growth and prosperity. It's the nature of economics. You might read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. It does a great job of observing the natural flow of economies.

KS was doing better economically before the tax cuts than it was after them:

Ok, I'm not going to get into a drawn out back and forth. The fact is that economics is very complicated. There is rarely a simple cause and effect, do this and this will always occur. Comparing what happens in Ca to Ks is just silly. There economies are vastly different. If you study/research economics, you will realize how little you know. That's why they give Nobel prizes and PhDs for people who advance the science. It's similar in that regard to the climate; very complicated, a lot of moving parts, and can rarely be condensed to a simple formula.

 

[The Derp]

Ok, I'm not going to get into a drawn out back and forth. The fact is that economics is very complicated. There is rarely a simple cause and effect, do this and this will always occur. Comparing what happens in Ca to Ks is just silly. There economies are vastly different. If you study/research economics, you will realize how little you know. That's why they give Nobel prizes and PhDs for people who advance the science. It's similar in that regard to the climate; very complicated, a lot of moving parts, and can rarely be condensed to a simple formula.

In 2012, Brownback said the tax cuts would "provide a shot of adrenaline" into the economy. They didn't. Norquist and Laffer said they'd pay for themselves. They didn't. McConnell said of the Brownback Tax Cuts that they're "exactly what Republicans want to do in DC". The problem is that Conservatives have sold tax cuts as a simplistic solution and made it party dogmatic orthodoxy for the last 37 years. So since the tax cuts don't deliver on the promises made of them, maybe they shouldn't make promises at all?

 

[JBond]

Ok, I'm not going to get into a drawn out back and forth. The fact is that economics is very complicated. There is rarely a simple cause and effect, do this and this will always occur. Comparing what happens in Ca to Ks is just silly. There economies are vastly different. If you study/research economics, you will realize how little you know. That's why they give Nobel prizes and PhDs for people who advance the science. It's similar in that regard to the climate; very complicated, a lot of moving parts, and can rarely be condensed to a simple formula.

In 2012, Brownback said the tax cuts would "provide a shot of adrenaline" into the economy. They didn't. Norquist and Laffer said they'd pay for themselves. They didn't. McConnell said of the Brownback Tax Cuts that they're "exactly what Republicans want to do in DC". The problem is that Conservatives have sold tax cuts as a simplistic solution and made it party dogmatic orthodoxy for the last 37 years. So since the tax cuts don't deliver on the promises made of them, maybe they shouldn't make promises at all?

The reality is, the "shot of adrenaline" was offset by the decline in sales tax, (which was mainly due to falling commodity prices). Even with all the challenges, GDP is up and government spending and taxes are down. These are good things. Kansas will be fine. California and Illinois have far graver long-term issues.

 

[The Derp]

The reality is, the "shot of adrenaline" was offset by the decline in sales tax, (which was mainly due to falling commodity prices).

Commodity prices weren't exclusive to just KS, as all states had to deal with that. A "Shot of adrenaline" would mean that sales tax revenue would increase because of increased consumption as a result of tax cuts. That's the GOP dogma. So no, the shot of adrenaline should not be dependent on sales tax revenue from falling commodity prices since all of KS' neighbors had to deal with that too. Only, they all had GDP growth better than KS did.

Even with all the challenges, GDP is up and government spending and taxes are down.

NO! They just repealed the tax cuts, in addition to the several excise and sales tax increases that were made a couple years after the tax cut. GDP is "up" but is below the national average and all its neighboring states. Government spending was cut, which forced students to take out bigger loans to attend the KS State University system, as well as co-pays and co-insurance costs rose for those on Medicaid. Fact is, none of the promises made of the tax cuts came to pass. So they're not a success. All they did was produce record deficits and poor growth.

These are good things. Kansas will be fine. California and Illinois have far graver long-term issues.

No, they don't have long-term issues. You all screech about "unfunded pensions" and try to scare people with big numbers but always missing from those numbers is the context. You say they have "unfunded liabilities"...that's over how many years? Since liabilities are fulfilled by tax revenue, I'm interested to know how you can accurately predict what tax revenues will be 10, 20, 50 years from now...the time your "unfunded liabilities" argument covers.

 

[12icer]

More liberal sttooooopud economics. Your entire premise is WRONG, and it is a LIE like most liberal propaganda. The idea in cutting taxes is to spur growth. IF you add a lot of spending programs Which is what they actually did You will have a shortfall if you do not allow for already in place emergency funds. That is exactly what happened. The tax cuts would not have covered the shortfall even if it had not taken place because of emergency outlay LIAR!!

 

[IsaacNewton]

Yet Conservatives want to do what they did in Kansas for the rest of the country. Kansas cut taxes in 2012, then saw a $900M shortfall, a couple credit downgrades, economic growth below the national average, job growth below the national average, business creation below the national average, raised tuition costs, raised excise taxes, raised co-pays and out of pocket costs for Medicaid, raided the Highway Fund, raided the welfare block grant, and had to close schools early because they didn't have money to keep them open. And they still couldn't balance their budget.

Tax cuts caused this.

Trump's response? It's fake news, Kansas has a 20 trillion dollar surplus, don't believe what the media tells you. That's why we're doing the same nationally. It'll be great, trust me.

Yeah...no.

 

[The Derp]

The idea in cutting taxes is to spur growth

Only it never does that because it's a faulty premise; that people will increase consumption if their taxes are cut. That didn't happen in KS, and it certainly didn't happen during Bush the Dumber. You can call it whatever you want; supply-side, voodoo economics, trickle-down...the premise is a load of crap and always has been. Cutting taxes does not lead to increased growth. Didn't happen in KS, so why would it happen anywhere else?

IF you add a lot of spending programs Which is what they actually did You will have a shortfall if you do not allow for already in place emergency funds.

Here's the KS budget with the tax cuts and without (SB 30). Can you please tell me if the budgets with SB 30 result in surpluses or deficits? Thanks.

The tax cuts would not have covered the shortfall even if it had not taken place because of emergency outlay LIAR!!

No, they didn't, as we see in the above budgets. The tax cuts produced deficits. That's what the overview above shows.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ok, I'm not going to get into a drawn out back and forth. The fact is that economics is very complicated. There is rarely a simple cause and effect, do this and this will always occur. Comparing what happens in Ca to Ks is just silly. There economies are vastly different. If you study/research economics, you will realize how little you know. That's why they give Nobel prizes and PhDs for people who advance the science. It's similar in that regard to the climate; very complicated, a lot of moving parts, and can rarely be condensed to a simple formula.

In 2012, Brownback said the tax cuts would "provide a shot of adrenaline" into the economy. They didn't. Norquist and Laffer said they'd pay for themselves. They didn't. McConnell said of the Brownback Tax Cuts that they're "exactly what Republicans want to do in DC". The problem is that Conservatives have sold tax cuts as a simplistic solution and made it party dogmatic orthodoxy for the last 37 years. So since the tax cuts don't deliver on the promises made of them, maybe they shouldn't make promises at all?

Ok, now you are mixing economics with politics. Making promises that are not kept is the stock and trade of all politicians on both sides of the aisle. That can't be news to you, is it?