Trickle down voodoo-economics at work....

Mott the Hoople said:
Sorry but you’re wrong. Tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts have been the single largest drivers of deficits and our national debt. There is little evidence that tax cuts, particularly regressive tax cuts, create economic growth and thus generate the revenue needed to sustain spending. That has not been supported by the facts. Regressive tax cuts have always starved the government of revenue which has forced borrowing to sustain spending at times when we should be paying down debt and have exacerbated economic inequality by the regressive nature of the tax cuts.

Those are the facts of Supply Side economics and why it is a failed economic theory like communism.
Click to expand...

It's just not true. Tax cuts have ALWAYS corresponded with increased revenue. Look up the numbers, it is utterly irrefutable.

If you continue to spend more than you take in, deficits result. But that's a separate issue.

For your convenience.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/federal-receipt-and-outlay-summary
 
countryboy said:
It's just not true. Tax cuts have ALWAYS corresponded with increased revenue. Look up the numbers, it is utterly irrefutable.

If you continue to spend more than you take in, deficits result. But that's a separate issue.

For your convenience.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/federal-receipt-and-outlay-summary
Click to expand...
Dude...your own table shows you are wrong. Kennedy and Johnson implemented a 21% tax cut in 1961. Receipts declined in 62, 64 and 66. Reagan's first round of tax cuts didn't go into affect until 82. Federal receipts then declined four years in a row, 82, 83, 84 and 85. Reagan cut taxes again in 86 and receipts declined from 1987 and did not recover to 1982 levels till 1997 after Clinton raised the marginal rate around 5%. W then cut the marginal tax rate by 5% and receipts declined from 2000 levels to this very day and only began to increase, after they tanked in 2008, and only significantly so after Congress allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire.

So your own data proves you wrong. There is simply no predictable correlation between top marginal tax rates and economic growth and these tax cuts to the top marginal rats have reduced revenues. Please review the charts in the link below on how cuts to the tax rates affect economic growth. The data is clear in that the data does not provide predictable outcomes mainly because their are many factors that impact economic growth of which tax rates are one small factor.


https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/gop-tax-rate-cut-wealthy/
 
Last edited:
leaningright said:
Look at this picture. Several years ago Lorax (Thing1 for the newbies) and I had a discussion where we both concluded that the political landscape was pitting urban folks agains rural folks and we didn’t like that direction. Sadly, it seems that is where we are. This picture is of a rural man, not an unintelligent looking fellow, with a firearm and pickup truck portrayed as a Republican president supporter voting against his own best interests and is too stupid to realize it.

Fact of the matter is that most rural voters couldn’t care less about taxes when it comes to president. Other issues trump (no pun intended) taxes. They know that the handouts would flow more freely under democrats but they choose independence and freedom instead and most of them see that in the more conservative candidate. These aren’t dumb people but people who are willing to sacrifice in one area to advance in the other.

The families who live here but the husbands work in the oilfield have already seen some benefit of the restructuring of the tax code, but of course they make more money than the norm.

I don’t like this pitting one group against another and try to curb it in my daily conversations with folks (students and friends...but definitely students) who bemoan those “city slickers”, but that is the political climate we live in.
Click to expand...
It’s a joke, jeebus, you and the other dude need to lighten up.
 
cawacko said:
Please share with us the economic theory that you believes has higher growth but doesn't go to people at the top.
Click to expand...

Start with increasing minimum wage. Then increase the taxes on the wealthy and money managers . Use part of that on the debt and increase infrastructure spending. Higher growth and job creation result. Money to the poor and middle class will increase demand. that is what creates hiring and expansion.
 
Nordberg said:
Start with increasing minimum wage. Then increase the taxes on the wealthy and money managers . Use part of that on the debt and increase infrastructure spending. Higher growth and job creation result. Money to the poor and middle class will increase demand. that is what creates hiring and expansion.
Click to expand...

Increasing minimum wage = more automation and more unemployment

So the fact that the top 20% of Americans pay 87% of personal income taxes isn't enough. We need it go even higher? And that's going to create job growth?

So basically your vision of growth is just more income redistribution - nothing to do with expansion of the private sector
 
cawacko said:
Increasing minimum wage = more automation and more unemployment

So the fact that the top 20% of Americans pay 87% of personal income taxes isn't enough. We need it go even higher? And that's going to create job growth?

So basically your vision of growth is just more income redistribution - nothing to do with expansion of the private sector
Click to expand...

BS. More automation has been going on for generations. They are replacing every job they can now.

Will you idiots ever learn simple math? The fact that you claim the wealthy pay 87 percent of taxes collected shows the opposite of what you think it does. Their tax rates have been slashed over and over. All it shows is they have all the fucking money. Learn something. http://apps.urban.org/features/wealth-inequality-charts/
 
wars built on lies and crashed economies

that is the republicans modern history


Bush and Trump


good economies and lower debt is what The Democratic party modern history is


kiss it goodbye

the republican partys gig is up


with the internets viewers can see your lies


its why you came up with fake news for your idiots to swallow
 
Nordberg said:
BS. More automation has been going on for generations. They are replacing every job they can now.

Will you idiots ever learn simple math? The fact that you claim the wealthy pay 87 percent of taxes collected shows the opposite of what you think it does. Their tax rates have been slashed over and over. All it shows is they have all the fucking money. Learn something. http://apps.urban.org/features/wealth-inequality-charts/
Click to expand...

B.S. that an increased minimum wage will bring more automation? Ok.

So once again absolutely nothing about economic growth. You believe the economy is a zero-sum game.

How about you learn that economic growth, and standard of living, can increase while inequality does as well. Your obsession with inequality is like Trump's with trade imbalances. You can't see the forest for the trees. You don't understand the big picture.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Agreed. For me the issue is that supply side tax cuts, without spending cuts, are the main drivers for debt and economic inequality.
Click to expand...

Whether you raise or lower taxes is not the relevant point. It is whether or not you outspend your revenue. Bush and Obama proved you can both lower taxes and raise taxes and STILL outspend revenue.

Tax cuts in the short term do not need spending cuts, but in the long term they should be there or it won't be sustainable unless you have long term sustainable growth.

It also depends on the start point. If you cut taxes from a high level, they are going to be more impactful on the economy long term. If you lower them from an already low level, you likely get little economic boost with very likely increasing deficits.

Supply side and Keynesian will both work if implemented properly. The problem is, the idiots in DC can't stop increasing federal spending.
 
evince said:
wars built on lies and crashed economies

that is the republicans modern history


Bush and Trump


good economies and lower debt is what The Democratic party modern history is


kiss it goodbye

the republican partys gig is up


with the internets viewers can see your lies


its why you came up with fake news for your idiots to swallow
Click to expand...

$10 TRILLION in debt by OBAMA
 
Fentoine Lum said:
Bipartisan ain't it.
Click to expand...

Very much. It's worse on the Republican side because they talk about fiscal discipline on the campaign trail then do nothing about it while in office but for Desh to claim Democrats are the party of fiscal discipline is laughably partisan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top