- Thread starter
- #21
You can watch the whole video or cut to time frame 3:49 Charlie Gibson asked obama in the 2008 democratic debat. "why raise taxes when lower taxes brings in more money" Or something like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akLlxxWaJZM&feature=related
"Taking from the rich through much higher tax rates in order to help the poor and middle class makes no sense intellectually and has seldom worked in practice. Reducing rates, on the other hand, does increase the share of taxes paid by the highest income-earning group. For example, in 1981, when the highest tax rate on the rich was 70% and the top capital gains tax rate was close to 45%, the richest 1% of Americans paid 17% of total income taxes. In 2005, with a top income tax rate of 35% and capital gains at 15%, the richest 1% of Americans paid 39%."
New Evidence on Taxes and Income
By ARTHUR B. LAFFER and STEPHEN MOORE
September 15, 2008; Page A23 http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122143692536934297.html
We need to relearn the lessons of the 1990s, when tax cuts helped ignite growth. Take the Giuliani administrations elimination, in 2000, of the tax on clothing purchases under $110. The next year, employment at city stores that sold clothing jumped by 7,000 jobsand collections from the sales tax actually increased by $52 million, as more New Yorkers stayed in the city to shop for taxable as well as nontaxable items.
The Citys Finances, Part 1: Life in Taxopolis by Steven Malanga, City Journal 10 July 2009
A review of tax data for high-income earners in the 1920s shows that as top tax rates were cut, tax revenues and the share of taxes paid by high-income taxpayers soared. Secretary Mellon knew that high tax rates caused the tax base to contract and that lower rates would boost economic growth. In 1924, Mellon noted: "The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid. The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business." He received strong support from President Coolidge, who argued that "the wise and correct course to follow in taxation and all other economic legislation is not to destroy those who have already secured success but to create conditions under which every one will have a better chance to be successful."
Internal Revenue Service data show that the across-the-board rate cuts of the early 1920s-including large cuts at the top end-resulted in greater tax payments and a larger tax share paid by those with high incomes. As tax rates were cut in the mid-1920s, total tax revenues initially fell. But as the economy responded and began growing quickly, revenues soared as incomes rose. By 1928, revenues had surpassed the 1920 level even though tax rates had been dramatically cut. 1920s Income Tax Cuts Sparked Economic Growth and Raised Federal Revenues | Veronique de Rugy | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary
Ah yes, all these nice theories. So why did the economy crash? You had your tax cut for the rich, why are we all not doing great at present?
And why did the economy boom after Clinton raised taxes in 1993? According to all this nonsense, that should have been impossible.
Laffer curve? Really good for a laugh.
Why did the economy crash? no regulation of freddy and fanny the pet projects of the democrats