Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How dare these Dumbocrats criticize the GOP when their majority Congress has an approval rate of less than 10%. The GOP is definitely in crisis but trying to say that your lame party is any better is HILARIOUS.Nancy Pelosi stated a few days ago that enforcing immigration laws is "unamerican", however, paying high taxes to the nanny government is "patriotic" according to Joe Biden. How can you even take these people seriously?
How dare these Dumbocrats criticize the GOP when their majority Congress has an approval rate of less than 10%. The GOP is definitely in crisis but trying to say that your lame party is any better is HILARIOUS.Nancy Pelosi stated a few days ago that enforcing immigration laws is "unamerican", however, paying high taxes to the nanny government is "patriotic" according to Joe Biden. How can you even take these people seriously?
Repubocrat, why do you continue to post the lie above after it has been disproven on more than one occasion on this board. There is a name used for people that lie and spread lies.
Here is still another website (Gallop) that debunks the propraganda manure you are spreading.
Seems the current DEMOCRATIC Congress has the highest public approval rating that Congress has had in 5 years. Under Bush it was around 10%, that is not true now, the rating is 39% and climbing.
Go ahead and read it, then tell me again how Obama is not an American.
The Republicans have no ideas and offer no solutions. Notice how they offer no ideas on the budget and instead just attack those who do come up with real solutions? That's because if you do write a budget then you have to make trade offs and they don't want to open themselves up to criticism and making a budget is sure to anger someone. Thus the GOP refuses to make any hard choices or offer any real solutions.
Sadly your in the minority, you kind of irrelevant
your -> you're
you -> you are
After hyperinflation kicks in, you'll be surprised how irrelevant Obama supporters will be, whether it's at the voting booth or at the wrong end of the barrel.
After hyperinflation kicks in, you'll be surprised how irrelevant Obama supporters will be, whether it's at the voting booth or at the wrong end of the barrel.
When a poster has to attack another poster on grammar or spelling it is an indication the person making the attack has an empty quiver of facts to reply with. So Peak, you are devoid of factual rebuttal again?
Explain how the Laffer 'experiment' was a disaster or did not serve us well.
I am interested to get YOUR opinion, not a cut and paste from someone else.
Firsts of The Laffer Curve says nothing more than there is an optimum tax rate that that both maximizes gov. revenue and economic growth.
Laffer doesn't claim to know what the optimum tax rate is. Perhaps it higher than 70% and perhaps its lower than 30%.
The Laffer Curve doesn't address the other concerns of the budget.
The reason it was a disaster is that it was misconstrued to mean that lower taxes was the answer to maximizing both issues of revenue and growth. So we lowered taxes and failed to even think about what if we are below the optimum rate(which we clearly are). So we are at the point now that we have to borrow money from other countries. Before we started all this nonsense atleast we were the creditors and we were owed money.
I think that based on the government income tax revenues it is clear that 28% for the top rate clearly collected more tax revenue than 70%.
I think you are right in that we still do not know the OPTIMAL level and I don't think there is any evidence to show that we are below the optimal level.
At the time the LC was introduced it was a clear win as far as government income tax revenue. Other examples have been successful outside of the personal income tax realm - that increases government tax revenue. I also see that the tax credits and tax deductions to individuals are not a sustainable means to increase government revenue.
To make a blanket statement and say that the Laffer Curve was a disaster or did not serve us well is entirely incorrect. It may be past its usefulness BUT at the time it was wildly successful. Now any tax increases or decreases are very marginal at best. Changing from 39.6% to 35% or the other way, is marginal at best and subject to inaccurate data points and varying overall market conditions that render its measuring sticks useless.
I think that based on the government income tax revenues it is clear that 28% for the top rate clearly collected more tax revenue than 70%..
70% was too high and will not argue with you on that point. I will however take exception if you say that 28% isn't too low!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bornandraised atl
I think you are right in that we still do not know the OPTIMAL level and I don't think there is any evidence to show that we are below the optimal level..
I do, I think the Clinton years show that we can bring in enough Gov. revenue to balance the budget while allowing business to boom. I think thatClinton not on showed that 30% was too low, he also proved that we 50% isn't necessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bornandraised atl
At the time the LC was introduced it was a clear win as far as government income tax revenue. Other examples have been successful outside of the personal income tax realm - that increases government tax revenue. I also see that the tax credits and tax deductions to individuals are not a sustainable means to increase government revenue. .
The LC simply stated that 100% tax allows no economic growth and 0% tax allows no Gov. revenue. I think that the curve should be taken as it is. A reminder of the give and take of tax policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bornandraised atl
To make a blanket statement and say that the Laffer Curve was a disaster or did not serve us well is entirely incorrect. It may be past its usefulness BUT at the time it was wildly successful. Now any tax increases or decreases are very marginal at best. Changing from 39.6% to 35% or the other way, is marginal at best and subject to inaccurate data points and varying overall market conditions that render its measuring sticks useless.
The disaster lies in not what the curve says its that it's been used (improperly) to make a case that we should always cut taxes regardless of the economic conditions, and that taxes should never be raised. I think the curve is still usefull to remind economist that optimum point is neither absolute. I think that economic conditions cheange and economics isn't an exact science. So the tax rate should probably be tweeked UP or down depending on the current conditions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
