Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

[unofan]

Of course why is this wrong on its face? (edit: not the curve, but the 50-70% dealie) It assumes that the gov't can spend money faster than those who aren't the government. Something we generally believe to be false. The gov't gets money every time it passes through a tax system. The proportion of money held by gov't may be higher, but the total that goes through their hands will be lower because it takes them time to spend it. The money goes through the private sector faster and the gov't collects its nickel or whatever, but the frequency it goes through the private sector means they get more of those shiny nickels.

edit: The gov't only gets money when money is moved by the private sector. To assume that a lower end person moves the money faster through transfer payments (as often happens in welfare gov't situations) assumes the gov't can efficiently off-load their take-in the first place

I'm not arguing that we need to maximize tax revenue (indeed, Diamond himself argues that the maximum federal tax rate should probably not be more than 49.9% from a general health of the economy standpoint).. I'm merely refuting fishy's (and most GOP shills') assertion that we're constantly and permanently on the right side of the inflection point of the laffer curve rather than the left.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

http://t.co/6MfQbLe5zm

More proof supply side is bunk and raising the minimum wage increases job growth..

[FreshFish]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Thus we conclude that raising the top tax rate is very likely to result in revenue increases."

So what? that's totally consistent with what I said. I said that actual revenue increase is less than expected revenue increase. I still used the word revenue "increase."

The curve you published is also consistent: the expected revenue increase is generally the tangent line to the curve, since the curve always has negative inflection, it rises more slowly than the tangent line. Again consistent.

So very kind of you to provide the research that demonstrates that my statement was indeed accurate. Quite surprising, actually, that you would do so in the name of "refuting" it, you actually supported it.

[Critical Thinker]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

http://t.co/6MfQbLe5zm

More proof supply side is bunk and raising the minimum wage increases job growth..

That's an interesting use of the word "proof."

[unofan]

So what? that's totally consistent with what I said. I said that actual revenue increase is less than expected revenue increase. I still used the word revenue "increase."

I put the farking direct quote from you in my post.

when they raise tax rates, revenue would decline,

Decline = increase. Got it...

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

That's an interesting use of the word "proof."

Yeah, that's a fairly weak proof.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Yeah, that's a fairly weak proof.

Yes, job growth is weak proof. Always has been. While, on the other hand the stock market is all the proof we ever need.

[Critical Thinker]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

http://t.co/6MfQbLe5zm

More proof supply side is bunk and raising the minimum wage increases job growth..

Yes, job growth is weak proof. Always has been. While, on the other hand the stock market is all the proof we ever need.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

Yeah, and if Kansas` tax cuts had generated jobs you'd guys be in here throwing a party.

Double Standard for the win.

[St. Clown]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Yes, job growth is weak proof. Always has been. While, on the other hand the stock market is all the proof we ever need.

What else is going on in that state? Increasing the price of labor isn't going to create an increase in the quantity of demand for that labor. There are other things happening, they've just been ignored by the reporter. Add to that, the economist quoted works for a notoriously liberal think tank, and we don't know what factors he used to come to his conclusion about any cause-effect relationship. There's so much missing from that article presented by those academic masterminds at Time Magazine.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

What else is going on in that state? Increasing the price of labor isn't going to create an increase in the quantity of demand for that labor. There are other things happening, they've just been ignored by the reporter. Add to that, the economist quoted works for a notoriously liberal think tank, and we don't know what factors he used to come to his conclusion about any cause-effect relationship. There's so much missing from that article presented by those academic masterminds at Time Magazine.

Same things are missing from the Supply Side Reagan Tax Cut Religion and the idea that the stock market has anything to do with job growth or the economy of real people.

[joecct]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

It seems to make sense that when the economy is doing well, you can afford to raise taxes. It's time to cut taxes when the economy is in the toilet.

Sadly, many of our political masters do the opposite.

[St. Clown]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Same things are missing from the Supply Side Reagan Tax Cut Religion and the idea that the stock market has anything to do with job growth or the economy of real people.

You really are just a pull quote, aren't you?

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

You really are just a pull quote, aren't you?

In my long observations of these threads, I'd say he's a sarcasm troll. He'll often put his views out there by citing an article that agrees with his position, then flip the discussion into snarky attacks on the opposing viewpoint instead of defending his own opinions - in essence, "my opinion is valid because yours sucks". Or, as we saw during the entire 2012 election cycle, he'll sarcastically declare that Obama/Democrats are "doomed" while dryly claiming that Romney/Republicans are awesome and will save the country.

[Critical Thinker]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Yeah, and if Kansas` tax cuts had generated jobs you'd guys be in here throwing a party.

Double Standard for the win.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque