Religion, Economics and Obama

Discussion in 'Economy' started by PoliticalChic, Sep 12, 2012.

  1. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,677
    Thanks Received:
    15,570
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,784
    The religion of taxation...

    1. You’ve heard of the guy who claimed he broke up with his girlfriend due to religious differences: she wouldn’t treat him like a god.
    Oh…you too?

    2. Generally, one identifies a religion as based on a deep personal faith, rather than testable, observable facts. When filtered through the Liberal perspective, the concept of taxation becomes a religious function.


    3. The Laffer Curve is accepted by all knowledgeable economists, professional or avocational, as a graphic representation of revenue accrued due to taxation.

    a. “In economics, the term Laffer curve refers to a hypothetical representation of the relationship between government revenue raised by taxation and all possible rates of taxation. It illustrates the concept oftaxable income elasticity – that taxable income will change in response to changes in the rate of taxation.” Laffer curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




    4. Dr. Tim Groseclose, economics professor, explains the Laffer Curve in this 5 minute video:

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayad5mbSSrU]Prager University: Do High Taxes Raise More Money? - YouTube[/ame]




    5. According the study, the point at which revenue ceases to increase is the 33% tax rate.

    a. One study of the United States between 1959 and 1991 placed the revenue-maximizing tax rate (the point at which another marginal tax rate increase would decrease tax revenue) between 32.67% and 35.21% Hsing, Y. (1996), "Estimating the Laffer curve and policy implications", Journal of Socio-Economics 25 (3): 395–401, doi:10.1016/S1053-5357(96)90013-X, http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S105353579690013X,




    6. A noted Liberal, Barack Obama, commented that the revenue purpose of taxation was secondary to the “fairness” function.

    a. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoqkOrA4tEs]Obama Taxes are for fairness - YouTube[/ame]




    7. Now…since there is no objective definition of what is “fair” from the Leftists who use the terminology, I suggest that it is a term of art more appropriate to a religion, i.e., it is based on a deep personal faith. But…our Leftist friends bridle at the very though of religion dictating government policy!! So….where does this leave us?

    a. The unspoken assumption is that there is something morally wrong with inequalities. Where is the explanation of what would be a ‘fair share’ for the wealthy to give up? Irving Kristol, as editor of ‘Public Interest,’ wrote to professors who had written about the unfairness of income distribution, asking them to write an article as to what a ‘fair distribution’ would be; he has never gotten that article. Irving Kristol, “Neoconservative: the Autobiography of an Idea,” p. 166



    8. Who is to decide what is fair, and what is too much? Some religions suggest tithing, and government demands taxes.

    a. Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%). So, in the Old Testament, 20% seems a maximum.




    9. So….what is the reason to choose the Liberal religious decree for the rate of taxation, over that of any other religion? Perhaps we should allow the economists to decide, rather than the 'priesthood.'


    Ohhhhooommmmmm.......
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. expat_panama
    Offline

    expat_panama Silver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,461
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +253
    Agreed.

    Let's also keep in mind something all good salespeople understand well, the fact that human nature is to make decisions on an emotional level and then mold reason and observation so as to justify the emotional decision.

    Sure, we all like to tell ourselves that we're reasonable and in control of our emotions, but grown-ups know observable results trump belief. The crazy left may run with child-like binges screeming "I want!" and "No fair!", but the rest of us calmly compare 2012 to 2008 and review choices...
     
  3. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,752
    Thanks Received:
    569
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Republic of Pequod
    Ratings:
    +569
    Love the cherry-picking. In the line right before talking about the one study you cite, it's noted that the average result in the literature, according to The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, is a revenue-maximizing rate of 70%.
     
  4. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,677
    Thanks Received:
    15,570
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,784
    "Major findings show that the bellshaped Laffer curve is statistically significant and that the revenue-maximizing tax rate is between 32.67% and 35.21%. The increase in the maximum personal income tax rate from 31% to 36% in the Budget Reconciliation Bill recently passed by the Congress is expected to push the U.S. position on the Laffer curve toward the maximum point and may reduce income tax revenue collected from the highest income group."
    ScienceDirect.com - Journal of Socio-Economics - Estimating the laffer curve and policy implications
     
  5. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,752
    Thanks Received:
    569
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Republic of Pequod
    Ratings:
    +569
    I'm glad you've found one study that supports your position. Now get back to us when you've considered the myriad other studies that don't go your way.
     
  6. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,677
    Thanks Received:
    15,570
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,784
    1. "Now get back to us..."

    The use of "us" is reserved for royalty, newspaper editorial writers, and those with a tapeworm.
    Get better soon.

    2. Now, let's discuss fools who descend to the use of the phrase "cherry picking."

    It generally represents one with an anemic argument, who is looking for some way to blunt a telling fact, or quote.


    In actuality, it fails to have any real import, unless the source has a dozen or so other facts that were ignored in order to choose the single one quoted.
    Obviously, this is not the case....so your use of same fails.


    3. I hope the above proves instructive to you, and aids in in polishing your writing skills.


    4. You may continue, though, to open your mouth when it is necessary to change feet.
     
  7. Rshermr
    Offline

    Rshermr VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,804
    Thanks Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Location:
    LaConner, WA
    Ratings:
    +855
    So Politicalchic, as she is wont to do, starts out a thread with a bold faced lie. She says:
    Truth is, few actual economists believe in the Laffer curve. A quick google search would prove that. For instance:
    Laughing at the Laffer Curve

    Via the IGM Forum:

    Question B: A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut.
    The resultant answers were: Not sure, 5%, Strongly Disagree, 38%, Disagree, 33%, Agree And Strongly Agree, 0%

    http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/06/laughing-at-the-laffer-curve.html

    This is a group of economists who regularly discuss and vote on economic issues. But you said all, PC, which is a complete lie. Why would you lie, PC. Would it be to sell a concept that you have no valid proof for??
    So, starting with that, what is left is simply more dogma from the right, and accusations made in the form of attacks. No valid statements anywhere, which is how it works with PoliticalChic.

    By the way, the tax rate paid by companies has very little to do with the actual rate, as deductions actually do make a difference, PC. Actual rate paid is what matters, and that is well under 20%.

    The laffer curve. You have got to be kidding.

    And Ann Coulter. Anyone who would post her quote would have to be not just nuts, but bat shit nuts.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2012
  8. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,752
    Thanks Received:
    569
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Republic of Pequod
    Ratings:
    +569
    What telling fact? You've found a single study that supports your position. The bulk of the research literature says something radically different. Your response has been to pretend that literature doesn't exist.
     
  9. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,677
    Thanks Received:
    15,570
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,784
    Another empty post.
     
  10. Polk
    Offline

    Polk Classic

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    9,752
    Thanks Received:
    569
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Republic of Pequod
    Ratings:
    +569
    The panel you linked to didn't say that those surveyed think the Laffer Curve is false (I don't know if anyone really believes that, noting the idea had been around for centuries before Laffer slapped his name on it). The panel (rightly) rejected the belief that current tax rates fall beyond the revenue-maximizing rate.
     

Share This Page