nonpartisan research: tax cuts won't fix economy

[TurtleDude]

Give us an original (non-talking point) analysis of the OP... or get lost. Dazzle us with your expertise. Do you even know what thread you're in or what the topic is?? Because every post in every thread sound exactly the same.

You can't write or debate.

You haven't demonstrated any critical thinking skills that I can see.

You don't have a JD.:lamo:lamo

Fraud, phony, fake.

The Yale Bullcrappers.

ten grand little man

how many good schools gave you the big rejection?

I can spot a wannabee through cyberspace

put up or shut up

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I'll pay ten kajillion to anyone who can conclusively prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that I didn't go to school on the Moon.

 

[SheWolf]

your arrogance is getting annoying. I would be happy to compare education and my CV with you any day of the week but you apparently are unable to even tell us your profession. Not only do I know what the laffer curve is, I know the man in question given his nephew was one of my better friends at Yale and due to that I was able to have dinner with the economist at least twice when he spoke to the yale politican union when I was an officer of that organization. You not only are wrong you lie about what I have said-the top ONE (read ONE NOT TWO) percent pay forty percent of the income tax.

your posts are that of an envious whiner

Are you suggesting expert knowledge by association.

My professor knows Laffer.. he has went to some conferences with him and they gave companies consulting advice for big bucks.

And I have heard from not only that proff. but others who have experience with Laffer that he is somewhat of a humble man.. He didn't really invent the Laffer curve, he admittedly took the idea from somebody else..

He also says that politicians mislead us with the Laffer curve.. He isn't a very partisan man either, which is somewhat surprising. You would think otherwise, but they guy actually thinks highly of Clinton and voted for him.. go figure

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Moderator's Warning:

hazlnut and turtle. Cut out the personal attacks now or there will be further consequences.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

And... as an aside. Turtle is who he says he is.

 

[TurtleDude]

Lets turn the question around

what good will come from hiking taxes only on the group that already pays almost half the income taxes

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Lets turn the question around

what good will come from hiking taxes only on the group that already pays almost half the income taxes

Why are you all still harping on income tax?
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, everyone's property, usage and every other tax is going way up. :shrug:

I'm not in the top 2% - but I'm sure as hell paying more taxes out of my pocket. Last year my dues were $115. The year before that they were $85. This year, though, they're $245. That's more than doubled in one years time.

State drains more than the government because they're not so concerned with public discourse and disapproval.

 

[phattonez]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/business/economy/11tax.html?_r=1&src=busln

After analyzing tax policies they conclude, tax cutting won't fix economy or reduce unemployment.

They gave high marks to an Obama proposal.. to allow small businesses to write off 100 percent of invest costs

But they went further and said that reducing payroll taxes and payments to Social Security and unemployed will stimulate the economy more than anything.

The article also says that politicians are reluctant advocate further stimulus, so neither party has guts. They are both going to stick to old, misguided rhetoric, than really try to fix something.

At least the politicians will have jobs I guess..

I wonder if this study took into account a crowding out effect and that giving people more money in general leads to more spending and more saving, hence more demand and more capital for production.

But I agree that a tax cut is worthless if there is no corresponding cut in spending. The crowding out problem will only get worse if you cut taxes but not spending.

 

[TurtleDude]

Why are you all still harping on income tax?
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, everyone's property, usage and every other tax is going way up. :shrug:

I'm not in the top 2% - but I'm sure as hell paying more taxes out of my pocket. Last year my dues were $115. The year before that they were $85. This year, though, they're $245. That's more than doubled in one years time.

State drains more than the government because they're not so concerned with public discourse and disapproval.

well if state tax issues were on the front burner I guess I would be discussing this stuff. And yeah, lots of people in the top 2% pay far more than the 39.6% that Obama wants to jack them up to. Many of those people-not the Bill Gates multi billionaires but merely people in the 200-1 million range are paying well over 50% of the income right now to taxes especially if they live in High tax states like Ohio, Ny, Mass, etc.

but its the income tax congress uses as a power grab and uses to buy the votes of so many people so that is why it is more important

 

[Aunt Spiker]

well if state tax issues were on the front burner I guess I would be discussing this stuff. And yeah, lots of people in the top 2% pay far more than the 39.6% that Obama wants to jack them up to. Many of those people-not the Bill Gates multi billionaires but merely people in the 200-1 million range are paying well over 50% of the income right now to taxes especially if they live in High tax states like Ohio, Ny, Mass, etc.

but its the income tax congress uses as a power grab and uses to buy the votes of so many people so that is why it is more important

Ok- yes - from that perspective I get your point.

 

[washunut]

well if state tax issues were on the front burner I guess I would be discussing this stuff. And yeah, lots of people in the top 2% pay far more than the 39.6% that Obama wants to jack them up to. Many of those people-not the Bill Gates multi billionaires but merely people in the 200-1 million range are paying well over 50% of the income right now to taxes especially if they live in High tax states like Ohio, Ny, Mass, etc.

but its the income tax congress uses as a power grab and uses to buy the votes of so many people so that is why it is more important

These taxes are on the front burner. Obama and team keep saying that we are only going back to the taxes paid under Clinton. That is a half truth, that pointing to these other taxes exposses

 

[Boo Radley]

jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster

Well, those taxes have been cut for awhile, so where are the jobs?

 

[phattonez]

Well, those taxes have been cut for awhile, so where are the jobs?

I wasn't aware that the jobs figures were only influenced by one variable, that being effective tax rate.

 

[Boo Radley]

I wasn't aware that the jobs figures were only influenced by one variable, that being effective tax rate.

On that we agree, which is why I have trouble with the tax cut argueement. There are amny variables, and taxes play a much smaller role than many of them. I doubt ver serioussly the proposed tax increase will have any noticeable effect on jobs, but will have an effect on the deficit.

 

[Geo Patric]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/business/economy/11tax.html?_r=1&src=busln

After analyzing tax policies they conclude, tax cutting won't fix economy or reduce unemployment.

They gave high marks to an Obama proposal.. to allow small businesses to write off 100 percent of invest costs

But they went further and said that reducing payroll taxes and payments to Social Security and unemployed will stimulate the economy more than anything.

The article also says that politicians are reluctant advocate further stimulus, so neither party has guts. They are both going to stick to old, misguided rhetoric, than really try to fix something.

At least the politicians will have jobs I guess..

it is not the first time this conclusion has been reached. nor will it be the first time it is ignored.

geo.

 

[phattonez]

On that we agree, which is why I have trouble with the tax cut argueement. There are amny variables, and taxes play a much smaller role than many of them. I doubt ver serioussly the proposed tax increase will have any noticeable effect on jobs, but will have an effect on the deficit.

Tax cuts, all other things being equal, is good for employment in that you will have more opportunities to do valuable work because there will be more capital goods (lower taxes will result in more investment). This isn't to say that if we cut taxes that overnight employment numbers will improve, but it is to say that if you want employment numbers to improve that this is just one of many things that should be done.

 

[TurtleDude]

Well, those taxes have been cut for awhile, so where are the jobs?

do you think tax hikes would create more jobs?

 

[TurtleDude]

On that we agree, which is why I have trouble with the tax cut argueement. There are amny variables, and taxes play a much smaller role than many of them. I doubt ver serioussly the proposed tax increase will have any noticeable effect on jobs, but will have an effect on the deficit.

that is incorrect. the dems would lose power by cutting spending. They use these tax hikes as a way of convincing the slow witted that they are trying to do something about the deficit but even if they were to confiscate all income over 100K a person they couldn't make up for the idiotic spending they have now

if deficit reduction was really a concern of the dems they wouldn't be pushing for the vote buying tax cut for the many and they would be cutting back spending. They have done neither and the rich should not pay even more a share of the tax burden to fund irresponsible spending on behalf of the rest of the voting public

 

[Boo Radley]

that is incorrect. the dems would lose power by cutting spending. They use these tax hikes as a way of convincing the slow witted that they are trying to do something about the deficit but even if they were to confiscate all income over 100K a person they couldn't make up for the idiotic spending they have now

if deficit reduction was really a concern of the dems they wouldn't be pushing for the vote buying tax cut for the many and they would be cutting back spending. They have done neither and the rich should not pay even more a share of the tax burden to fund irresponsible spending on behalf of the rest of the voting public

No one will keep power if the cut too much spending. Even the Tea Party folks yell don't touch my SS or medicare. That's part of the problem with the electorate. They want programs, they really do, and they want tax cuts. There is a real and serious disconnect with this.

The fact is, if any of us are really concerned about debt reduction, we would argue for cutting spending and raising taxes. Anything less is not serious, and the debt will continue to grow. And it has grown under both democrat and republican control. So, pretending it is partisan is another fool's game.

 

[Boo Radley]

do you think tax hikes would create more jobs?

I don't think taxes do either, create or cost jobs. So, as jobs are concerned, taxes are not in the equation to any real or serious degree.

 

[TurtleDude]

No one will keep power if the cut too much spending. Even the Tea Party folks yell don't touch my SS or medicare. That's part of the problem with the electorate. They want programs, they really do, and they want tax cuts. There is a real and serious disconnect with this.

The fact is, if any of us are really concerned about debt reduction, we would argue for cutting spending and raising taxes. Anything less is not serious, and the debt will continue to grow. And it has grown under both democrat and republican control. So, pretending it is partisan is another fool's game.

a good post but the rich already pay too much of the taxes and consume little of the spending. the progressive income tax where the many could jack up the taxes of the few is what caused this mess

 

[Boo Radley]

Tax cuts, all other things being equal, is good for employment in that you will have more opportunities to do valuable work because there will be more capital goods (lower taxes will result in more investment). This isn't to say that if we cut taxes that overnight employment numbers will improve, but it is to say that if you want employment numbers to improve that this is just one of many things that should be done.

I've found no evidence to support that. Even recent reports say such isn't true. Tax cuts have little to no effect on jobs. So, while it may seem logical to us that it would, and certainly we can fine someone who says it will (and won't), what is needed is some objective evidence that it does. Historically, we've seen the economy do well will a high tax rate and poor with a low tax rate, and the reverse. There has been little to support that taxes effect the economy either way.

 

[Boo Radley]

a good post but the rich already pay too much of the taxes and consume little of the spending. the progressive income tax where the many could jack up the taxes of the few is what caused this mess

I've sen no evidence that a progressive tax caused this mess. Without such evidence, I can't accpet your proposition. What evidence I have seen is that taxes don't effect the spending of the wealthy to any measurable degree.

 

[TurtleDude]

I've sen no evidence that a progressive tax caused this mess. Without such evidence, I can't accpet your proposition. What evidence I have seen is that taxes don't effect the spending of the wealthy to any measurable degree.

do you pay top bracket taxes? I tire of being told I don't pay enough by people who are pandering for the votes of low bracket payers or non payers.

and given tax hikes on the rich cannot keep up with government spending, where is it going to end

if you set a table and refuse to see what it brings then I cannot help it and its in your interest to pretend that a system that not only allows the many to vote up the taxes of the few but the political system encourages that, is creating a recipe for disaster

you can admit or deny it but the fact is the dems campaing rhetoric constantly tries to appeal to class warfare with the claims that the tax cuts Benefited the rich even though the rich now pay more of the tax burden.

 

[TurtleDude]

I've sen no evidence that a progressive tax caused this mess. Without such evidence, I can't accpet your proposition. What evidence I have seen is that taxes don't effect the spending of the wealthy to any measurable degree.

BTW you missed some obvious proof-the luxury tax caused a major downturn in purchasing luxury items.