Republics

[Speaker to Animals]

I mean.. do we just have to put up with a bombastic fat guy in the House and a lecherous president who ruts fat interns in the Oval Office to get this done again? Re-elect Bill and Newt if you have to.

Fine. Whatever. Just get it done.

[Fife]

Then during tax cuts, you see the revenue drop. Hmm..

Show about nothing. A posteriori is political clap-trap.



Even Martin's patron saint, St. Krugman, is a skittish of deficit spending, at least since Hair-god got the nod.

If all you want to do is break some windows, the tax rate is pretty meaningless anyway, broheim.

[Fife]

The Laffer Curve is complete bullshit:

https://newrepublic.com/article/145331/ ... ican-party

Good one, Martin.

Anytime I am looking for some straight talk on econ, I just check the New Republic twitter feed.

:goteam: :drunk:

[Speaker to Animals]

Then during tax cuts, you see the revenue drop. Hmm..

Show about nothing. A posteriori is political clap-trap.



Even Martin's patron saint, St. Krugman, is a skittish of deficit spending, at least since Hair-god got the nod.

If all you want to do is break some windows, the tax rate is pretty meaningless anyway, broheim.

*cough* bullshit! *cough*

You asked what evidence I had that we are nowhere near this point. I pointed out that recent tax increases resulted in an increase in tax revenue. Likewise, recent tax cuts resulted in reductions in tax revenue.

Every time.

We have zero examples of tax cuts resulting in an increase in tax revenues at least since Eisenhower.

[Fife]

*cough* bullshit! *cough*

You asked what evidence I had that we are nowhere near this point. I pointed out that recent tax increases resulted in an increase in tax revenue. Likewise, recent tax cuts resulted in reductions in tax revenue.

Every time.

We have zero examples of tax cuts resulting in an increase in tax revenues at least since Eisenhower.

Now we're getting somewhere.

I agree with you: the curve is obviously logical; and the correlation of federal revenue with the Kafkaesque fuckery of the Internal Revenue Code is intractable.

You get a cookie, and and a level-up.

:goteam: :drunk:




It's not possible to determine where we are on the curve with any accuracy until we have federal spending at a legitimate level. At that point, the IRC will be dusted anyway, and measurements will be meaningful. Currently, federal "revenue" is whatever D.C. tells your country ass it is; it's a show about nothing compared to the actual story of what we are spending made-up money on.

[DBTrek]

Three times revenue increased after tax cuts

Post Eisenhower.

[Speaker to Animals]

Three times revenue increased after tax cuts

Post Eisenhower.

They are playing games with what they mean by "tax cuts", though. What they call a tax cut is usually not really a cut. They cut the rate on certain brackets, remove exemptions and credits, and they actually passed a tax increase. The tax decreases for the middle class are almost always limited in duration while the cuts on things like capital gains taxes are permanent. They get an increase in revenue because people are paying taxes on things they previously weren't taxed on. So even though they receive a modest decrease in the rate, they are still taxed on more things. For example, Trump just cut taxes on the middle class ostensibly, but removed things like personal exemptions. He also made them temporary, while the absolutely enormous tax cuts on the wealthy are totally permanent.

You are getting played. These neocons really have you wrapped up tight, apparently.

We were not anywhere near the point at which, in a simple taxation system, a flat decrease in taxes across the board would increase revenues. They are shuffling around how they take your money and calling it a "tax cut". Every time.

On the other hand, we already know the democrats consistently pass tax hikes for fucking everybody, so we can look at those hikes and well see that they resulted in an increase in tax revenue. Therefore, we were NOT at that point.

[Martin Hash]

I seem to remember twice in this thread mentioning the $60 trillion debt since Reaganomics started but no one can read.

[Speaker to Animals]

Another way you can see the truth in it is that tax revenue by percentage of GDP has been moving sideways for decades, and is sporadically falling. This point of diminishing returns is at least correlated with the percentage of the GDP we are actually taxing. But that's not going up.

[Speaker to Animals]

I seem to remember twice in this thread mentioning the $60 trillion debt since Reaganomics started but no one can read.

"Help the rich get richer and you proles will see more money"

That's Reaganomics in a nutshell.