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.
I have not seen any economic analysis outside of the White House that shows enough future revenue generated due to economic growth to justify the cost of these cuts.
That's because no such analysis exists.
Even though members of the Trump administration, like Mnuchin, claimed it did.
At this point they are literally resorting to blatant lies and making up numbers.
IMO Trump is using the presidency to make as much money as he possibly can, both for himself and for his kids. He got rid of the estate tax too, so they don't have to pay taxes on their inheritance. It's like a four year heist but with extra golf.
I am absolutely amazed watching these types of people, who decried the previous presidents actions in the name of the national debt, show zero interest in reducing it now.
See how hypocrisy works? Both ways.
Agreed. The difference being those people have generally always been in favor of tax cuts. Reducing spending is generally thier aim.
The Laffer Curve has been debunked, otherwise the Gipper wouldn't have had to increase taxes after cutting them
The Laffer Curve itself is actually very, very simple. All it says is : "At a certain point, increasing the rate starts to decrease the revenue." In that sense it is accurate and just common sense. Raising tax rates to 90% or 100% obviously will result in a revolt.
The problem is people who think that it means, "ALL tax cuts increase revenue." As if a reduction from 35% to 25% increases revenue. (It doesn't.) This common misconception makes sense considering Arthur Laffer is a partisan hack and a complete failure as a professional economist.
There was a study a few years back that attempted to find the optimal tax rate, the point at which rate increases start to experience diminishing revenue returns. Their conclusion? At 70%. Anything less than a 70% tax rate will see no gains from rate cuts. Obviously, this news was not widely shared or celebrated among the Laffer-enthusiasts (or as I call them, the Laffingstock.)
What I'm hearing you say, Pedro, is that you don't know how debt works or where debt comes from. I suspect you may not even know what reserve banking is.
What I'm hearing you say, Pedro, is that you don't know how debt works or where debt comes from. I suspect you may not even know what reserve banking is.
Well, let’s hear you explain exactly how it causes debt without spending.
Well, let’s hear you explain exactly how it causes debt without spending.
Hurry, I have to leave in a few minutes.
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.
