The myth of the Laffer Curve and Trump’s proposed tax plan…

[NYcarbineer]

It all began in 1974, applied during the dreadful Reagan years (Reaganomics…aka trickle-down theory) and is NOW being touted by our beloved Trump to further screw up our teetering economy.

The Laffer Curve is a theory developed by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer to show the relationship between tax rates and the amount of tax revenue collected by governments. The curve is used to illustrate Laffer's main premise that the more an activity such as production is taxed, the less of it is generated.

Cutting taxes on America’s rich isn’t going to encourage them to invest more—those rich already have plenty to spend and aren’t spending it. Worse, by shifting wealth from middle class families to the moneyed few—a group that is able to consume far less than the working masses—this sort of policy suppresses consumption, which in turn discourages investment in productive businesses. Slowing demand drags on growth, causing debt and unemployment to rise.

Almost everything Republicans get wrong about the economy started with a cocktail napkin

Among many other failures, Reagan (and other GOPers) adoption of Laffer’s theory has basically given us a system that allows for the privatization of profits for big businesses, and the socialization of losses….leaving the middle class to subsidize the gambling by the rich on Wall Street.

I suppose you think taxes have no effect on productivity at all right?

Why not tax everyone and everything at 100% it matters not

lolol, why not tax everyone at ZERO, since you people believe that EVERY tax cut increases revenues.

 

[bendog]

Cutting taxes on investment is not crazy when there's not enough investment income to get growth. But no one in their right minds is saying corporations don't have over a trillion in "warehoused" earnings or that interest rates are too high.

The problem with the gop's tax plan is that it's not actually reform, but rather a group of cuts. And no one knows how much or where other revenue will come from. Trump and Bannon said tax cuts would fall to the middle (and even lower) class because those are the people who will spend, rather than save, more. Spending will increase growth because businesses will produce more.

Given the past 8 mos, no one should be optimistic.

 

[bendog]

It all began in 1974, applied during the dreadful Reagan years (Reaganomics…aka trickle-down theory) and is NOW being touted by our beloved Trump to further screw up our teetering economy.

The Laffer Curve is a theory developed by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer to show the relationship between tax rates and the amount of tax revenue collected by governments. The curve is used to illustrate Laffer's main premise that the more an activity such as production is taxed, the less of it is generated.

Cutting taxes on America’s rich isn’t going to encourage them to invest more—those rich already have plenty to spend and aren’t spending it. Worse, by shifting wealth from middle class families to the moneyed few—a group that is able to consume far less than the working masses—this sort of policy suppresses consumption, which in turn discourages investment in productive businesses. Slowing demand drags on growth, causing debt and unemployment to rise.

Almost everything Republicans get wrong about the economy started with a cocktail napkin

Among many other failures, Reagan (and other GOPers) adoption of Laffer’s theory has basically given us a system that allows for the privatization of profits for big businesses, and the socialization of losses….leaving the middle class to subsidize the gambling by the rich on Wall Street.

I suppose you think taxes have no effect on productivity at all right?

Why not tax everyone and everything at 100% it matters not

lolol, why not tax everyone at ZERO, since you people believe that EVERY tax cut increases revenues.

That's what we MUST DO. As Doc says, money belongs "to the peoples." Power to the peoples. Money does not belong to the gummit. No Taxes, none ... ever!

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you set the income tax rate at zero - you get no revenue.

If you set it at 1%, you get some revenue.

If you set it at 5%, you get some more revenue.

but if you go to 10%, what? More revenue? What about 15%? 20%?

At what rate do you start getting less revenue?

Do any of you know?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

It all began in 1974, applied during the dreadful Reagan years (Reaganomics…aka trickle-down theory) and is NOW being touted by our beloved Trump to further screw up our teetering economy.

The Laffer Curve is a theory developed by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer to show the relationship between tax rates and the amount of tax revenue collected by governments. The curve is used to illustrate Laffer's main premise that the more an activity such as production is taxed, the less of it is generated.

Cutting taxes on America’s rich isn’t going to encourage them to invest more—those rich already have plenty to spend and aren’t spending it. Worse, by shifting wealth from middle class families to the moneyed few—a group that is able to consume far less than the working masses—this sort of policy suppresses consumption, which in turn discourages investment in productive businesses. Slowing demand drags on growth, causing debt and unemployment to rise.

Almost everything Republicans get wrong about the economy started with a cocktail napkin

Among many other failures, Reagan (and other GOPers) adoption of Laffer’s theory has basically given us a system that allows for the privatization of profits for big businesses, and the socialization of losses….leaving the middle class to subsidize the gambling by the rich on Wall Street.

I suppose you think taxes have no effect on productivity at all right?

Why not tax everyone and everything at 100% it matters not

lolol, why not tax everyone at ZERO, since you people believe that EVERY tax cut increases revenues.

That would be great....set the economy free......
It used to be ZERO......and it could be done if we cut spending to ZERO.....

Most of us want basic government services such as military protection but we could get rid of most of the rest of big government and lower our federal taxes to something close to ZERO....

WHY NOT? why do you 'progressives' continually advocate for more and more taxes...? And what's with this 'paying for' tax cuts bs ?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Unfortunately for us, tax cuts primarily for the rich is something Trump and the establishment gop agree upon.

Bannon does not, but .... he created this monster.

/----/ " tax cuts primarily for the rich "
View attachment 151785

How can you possibly dispute that the tax cuts will primarily go to the rich?

/----/ the upper limits will not change. But everyone else will get a lower rate. Call your accountant and ask him.

 

[bendog]

If you set the income tax rate at zero - you get no revenue.

If you set it at 1%, you get some revenue.

If you set it at 5%, you get some more revenue.

but if you go to 10%, what? More revenue? What about 15%? 20%?

At what rate do you start getting less revenue?

Do any of you know?

Seriously? You were looking for an informed answer to this query? From Trumpteers?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you set the income tax rate at zero - you get no revenue.

If you set it at 1%, you get some revenue.

If you set it at 5%, you get some more revenue.

but if you go to 10%, what? More revenue? What about 15%? 20%?

At what rate do you start getting less revenue?

Do any of you know?

Seriously? You were looking for an informed answer to this query? From Trumpteers?

It goes to the core of their relentless argument that lowering taxes increases revenues,

lol, why shouldn't they be able to give a serious, intelligent, detailed, evidence based response???

 

[bendog]

If you set the income tax rate at zero - you get no revenue.

If you set it at 1%, you get some revenue.

If you set it at 5%, you get some more revenue.

but if you go to 10%, what? More revenue? What about 15%? 20%?

At what rate do you start getting less revenue?

Do any of you know?

Seriously? You were looking for an informed answer to this query? From Trumpteers?

It goes to the core of their relentless argument that lowering taxes increases revenues,

lol, why shouldn't they be able to give a serious, intelligent, detailed, evidence based response???

they would need an economics 101 textbook.

 

[rightwinger]

All tax cuts pay for themselves......

What could possibly go wrong?

I never understood "we need to pay for the tax cut". Just cut spending.

How can you possibly dispute that the tax cuts will primarily go to the rich?

The people who pay taxes should get a cut.

Why should we cut taxes when we are $20 trillion in debt

 

[rightwinger]

It all began in 1974, applied during the dreadful Reagan years (Reaganomics…aka trickle-down theory) and is NOW being touted by our beloved Trump to further screw up our teetering economy.

The Laffer Curve is a theory developed by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer to show the relationship between tax rates and the amount of tax revenue collected by governments. The curve is used to illustrate Laffer's main premise that the more an activity such as production is taxed, the less of it is generated.

Cutting taxes on America’s rich isn’t going to encourage them to invest more—those rich already have plenty to spend and aren’t spending it. Worse, by shifting wealth from middle class families to the moneyed few—a group that is able to consume far less than the working masses—this sort of policy suppresses consumption, which in turn discourages investment in productive businesses. Slowing demand drags on growth, causing debt and unemployment to rise.

Almost everything Republicans get wrong about the economy started with a cocktail napkin

Among many other failures, Reagan (and other GOPers) adoption of Laffer’s theory has basically given us a system that allows for the privatization of profits for big businesses, and the socialization of losses….leaving the middle class to subsidize the gambling by the rich on Wall Street.

I suppose you think taxes have no effect on productivity at all right?

Why not tax everyone and everything at 100% it matters not

lolol, why not tax everyone at ZERO, since you people believe that EVERY tax cut increases revenues.

That would be great....set the economy free......
It used to be ZERO......and it could be done if we cut spending to ZERO.....

Most of us want basic government services such as military protection but we could get rid of most of the rest of big government and lower our federal taxes to something close to ZERO....

WHY NOT? why do you 'progressives' continually advocate for more and more taxes...? And what's with this 'paying for' tax cuts bs ?

Anarchist

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Why should we cut taxes when we are $20 trillion in debt

Because the idea is to create growth....

Why do Democraps fight tooth and nail against any sort of spending cuts......unless it's military....?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

It all began in 1974, applied during the dreadful Reagan years (Reaganomics…aka trickle-down theory) and is NOW being touted by our beloved Trump to further screw up our teetering economy.

The Laffer Curve is a theory developed by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer to show the relationship between tax rates and the amount of tax revenue collected by governments. The curve is used to illustrate Laffer's main premise that the more an activity such as production is taxed, the less of it is generated.

Cutting taxes on America’s rich isn’t going to encourage them to invest more—those rich already have plenty to spend and aren’t spending it. Worse, by shifting wealth from middle class families to the moneyed few—a group that is able to consume far less than the working masses—this sort of policy suppresses consumption, which in turn discourages investment in productive businesses. Slowing demand drags on growth, causing debt and unemployment to rise.

Almost everything Republicans get wrong about the economy started with a cocktail napkin

Among many other failures, Reagan (and other GOPers) adoption of Laffer’s theory has basically given us a system that allows for the privatization of profits for big businesses, and the socialization of losses….leaving the middle class to subsidize the gambling by the rich on Wall Street.

I suppose you think taxes have no effect on productivity at all right?

Why not tax everyone and everything at 100% it matters not

lolol, why not tax everyone at ZERO, since you people believe that EVERY tax cut increases revenues.

That would be great....set the economy free......
It used to be ZERO......and it could be done if we cut spending to ZERO.....

Most of us want basic government services such as military protection but we could get rid of most of the rest of big government and lower our federal taxes to something close to ZERO....

WHY NOT? why do you 'progressives' continually advocate for more and more taxes...? And what's with this 'paying for' tax cuts bs ?

Anarchist

Communist

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why should we cut taxes when we are $20 trillion in debt

Because the idea is to create growth....

Why do Democraps fight tooth and nail against any sort of spending cuts......unless it's military....?

To keep the Right in line.

 

[bendog]

Why should we cut taxes when we are $20 trillion in debt

Because the idea is to create growth....

Why do Democraps fight tooth and nail against any sort of spending cuts......unless it's military....?

And ending the estate tax and AMT is going to create growth ... LOL

 

[nat4900]

Why should we cut taxes when we are $20 trillion in debt

What is outright, fucking AMAZING is that the wealthy, influential bribers in our own country have convinced right wing morons that if our government takes in LESS revenue.....our government will be better off.......

The same "logic" should be applied to these ultra rich folks in convincing THEM that they would be "richer" if they took in less profits.

 

[bendog]

Why should we cut taxes when we are $20 trillion in debt

What is outright, fucking AMAZING is that the wealthy, influential bribers in our own country have convinced right wing morons that if our government takes in LESS revenue.....our government will be better off.......

The same "logic" should be applied to these ultra rich folks in convincing THEM that they would be "richer" if they took in less profits.

Well the problem is that there are logically valid arguments that cutting taxes on workers or lowering the cap gains tax could, over time, result in more revenue.

The problem is Trump and the GOP took those arguments but use them to argue for tax cuts not directly aimed at those ends.

A classic bait and switch. Advertise something, but when you get to the store, they don't have that something but want to sell you something else.

 

[whitehall]

The teetering economy? Do radical lefties post from a cave next door to Osama's abandoned digs? The DOW is up an astonishing 20% in the nine months since Trump was elected. The S&P is up 500 points. Hypocrite lefties have been whining about "corporate welfare" for a couple of years while Hussein and the Hildabeast rake in the dollars for bullshit speeches to Wall Street bankers.

 

[nat4900]

The DOW is up an astonishing 20% in the nine months since Trump was elected. The S&P is up 500 points. Hypocrite lefties have been whining about "corporate welfare" for a couple of years while Hussein and the Hildabeast rake in the dollars for bullshit speeches to Wall Street bankers.

here you go, you dumb fuck head......LOL

S&P Global Market Intelligence compiled S&P 500 SPX, +0.12% performance for each postwar president, through the July of each president’s first term.

President S&P 500, taking office through end of July
Eisenhower -5.3%
Kennedy 11.3%
Nixon -9.7%
Carter -4%
Reagan -0.6%
George H.W. Bush 20.7%
Clinton 3.4%
George W. Bush -9.8%
Obama 22.6%
Trump 8.8%

Obama trumps Trump in stock-market gains through July

 

[baileyn45]

It always amazes me that the same people that insist that taxes do not affect economic activity will be the first to seek to tax cigarettes, alcohol or what not in order to affect economic activity. Whether you agree with the laffer curve or not, the idea that taxation has no effect on people's economic activity is ridiculous. I've been in business for going on 30 years and I can assure you tax policy has a direct and substantial influence on my economic decisions.