Tax cuts cause recessions, or booms of the economy?

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

 

[Wyatt earp]

JFK cut taxes boom ...nothing


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Bust & Boom cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Bust & Boom cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Bust & Boom cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

BAM?
No mention of the mechanism?
Or the time frame?

Recessions happen. Tax cuts or not.

We could just as easily say, SobieskiSavedEurope says something really fucking stupid, BAM recession.

​

It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.​

Only if you're blind.
Tax cuts in the 1920s, 1960s and 1980s all lead to strong economic growth.
​

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.​

Hoover never cut taxes.
​

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Bust & Boom cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Bust & Boom cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Bust & Boom cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

BAM?
No mention of the mechanism?
Or the time frame?

Recessions happen. Tax cuts or not.

We could just as easily say, SobieskiSavedEurope says something really fucking stupid, BAM recession.

It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

Only if you're blind.
Tax cuts in the 1920s, 1960s and 1980s all lead to strong economic growth.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Hoover never cut taxes.
​

Taxes were cut a ton before the Great Depression, basically every recession & depression HAPPENED right after tax cuts.

Republicans have these theories, that just don't work in practice.

Kind of like Commies have these theories, that also just don't work in practice.

 

[bendog]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

IMO there is no black white answer (unless you're a trump supporter (-

Tax cuts never actually pay for themselves. Reagan's initial tax cut/reform ended many tax shelters and non-productive allocations of capital. But he had to repeatedly raise taxes in light of deficits later in his admin.

Ford had a middle class tax cut that most Americans turned around and just didn't spend. It not only caused more debt but didn't spur consumer spending.

 

[Thinker101]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Obama cut taxes, BAM, lackluster economy.
Trump cut taxes, BAM, booming economy.

Seems the moral to this story is there's a whole lot more going on than just taxes.
Obama added a bunch of regulations, BAM, lackluster economy.
Trump dumped a bunch of regulations, BAM booming economy.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Bust & Boom cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Bust & Boom cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Bust & Boom cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

BAM?
No mention of the mechanism?

I didn't mention the mechanism??

Oh I did in fact, I theorized that Tax-Cuts cause inflated markets such as in Housing & Stock which cause BOOM & BUST cycle.

That's kind of what happened with W. Bush, No?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Obama cut taxes, BAM, lackluster economy.
Trump cut taxes, BAM, booming economy.

Seems the moral to this story is there's a whole lot more going on than just taxes.
Obama added a bunch of regulations, BAM, lackluster economy.
Trump dumped a bunch of regulations, BAM booming economy.

If only that were a fact, it's actually more of a fact that Trump's America is seeing a very slight decline in real wages, because inflation has sky-rocketed.

 

[Thinker101]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Obama cut taxes, BAM, lackluster economy.
Trump cut taxes, BAM, booming economy.

Seems the moral to this story is there's a whole lot more going on than just taxes.
Obama added a bunch of regulations, BAM, lackluster economy.
Trump dumped a bunch of regulations, BAM booming economy.

If only that were a fact, it's actually more of a fact that Trump's America is seeing a very slight decline in real wages, because inflation has sky-rocketed.

Damn, are we moving the goal post already?

 

[Mr.Blonde]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

I know this was unintentional, but at least 2 of your examples 1929 and 2008 are examples of Federal Reserve caused recessions.

In at least both of those examples the FED kept interest rates artificially low for a long time.

Trump's tax cuts may lead to a recession or at least contribute to one, but not in the way you are thinking.

You had the bailouts, the "stimulus package", QE 1-whatever. Companies hoarded the money. Trump is trying to release all that money which will cause inflation which will probably cause a very overdue recession.

That will in part cause a recession. The other thing that I think will cause one is the vastly over valuation of companies like Amazon and Facebook.

I do think Facebook in the end will go under, but that is a different discussion all together.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Hoover cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

I know this was unintentional, but at least 2 of your examples 1929 and 2008 are examples of Federal Reserve caused recessions.

In at least both of those examples the FED kept interest rates artificially low for a long time.

Trump's tax cuts may lead to a recession or at least contribute to one, but not in the way you are thinking.

You had the bailouts, the "stimulus package", QE 1-whatever. Companies hoarded the money. Trump is trying to release all that money which will cause inflation which will probably cause a very overdue recession.

That will in part cause a recession. The other thing that I think will cause one is the vastly over valuation of companies like Amazon and Facebook.

I do think Facebook in the end will go under, but that is a different discussion all together.

Actually, Hayek's theories of cutting interest rates leading to over-investment & thus a boom & bust cycle, would also apply to cutting taxes, which also lead to over-investment & thus a boom & bust cycle.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Promoting the general welfare means public policies should engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy.

Tax cut economics is a simple red herring if you omit the rest of budget like, Spending.

 

[irosie91]

I do not understand economics-----but I do know that the
phrase TAX CUT induces the production of endogenous
endorphins-----and sometimes---actual orgasm

 

[danielpalos]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

In my opinion, we should be using automatic stabilizers to automatically stabilize our economy. And, emulate truer capitalism, from a fixed Standard from Government.

Automatic stabilizers are economic policies and programs designed to offset fluctuations in a nation's economic activity without intervention by the government or policymakers on an individual basis. The best-known automatic stabilizers are corporate and personal taxes, and transfer systems such as unemployment insurance and welfare. Automatic stabilizers are so called because they act to stabilize economic cycles and are automatically triggered without explicit government action.

Read more: Automatic Stabilizer Automatic Stabilizer
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

 

[irosie91]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

In my opinion, we should be using automatic stabilizers to automatically stabilize our economy. And, emulate truer capitalism, from a fixed Standard from Government.

Automatic stabilizers are economic policies and programs designed to offset fluctuations in a nation's economic activity without intervention by the government or policymakers on an individual basis. The best-known automatic stabilizers are corporate and personal taxes, and transfer systems such as unemployment insurance and welfare. Automatic stabilizers are so called because they act to stabilize economic cycles and are automatically triggered without explicit government action.

Read more: Automatic Stabilizer Automatic Stabilizer
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

yeah? stabilizers? -------like egg yolks and lecithin?

 

[Thinker101]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Promoting the general welfare means public policies should engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy.

Tax cut economics is a simple red herring if you omit the rest of budget like, Spending.

Sure general welfare may have a positive effect on the lazy, but then again we know you libs get confused when it comes to any type of 'gender'.

 

[irosie91]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Promoting the general welfare means public policies should engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy.

Tax cut economics is a simple red herring if you omit the rest of budget like, Spending.

Sure general welfare may have a positive effect on the lazy, but then again we know you libs get confused when it comes to any type of 'gender'.

gender does not exist-------it is even MORE NEBULOUS than is race.
It is ENTIRELY color dependent------a pink/blue dichotomy------as opposed to lime green vs yellow. ultimately WHITE breaks down
into the hallowed RAINBOW

 

[Natural Citizen]

We don't get tax cuts, we get tax hikes sold to us as tax cuts. The GOP tax plan was another prime example of the charade.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

In my opinion, we should be using automatic stabilizers to automatically stabilize our economy. And, emulate truer capitalism, from a fixed Standard from Government.

Automatic stabilizers are economic policies and programs designed to offset fluctuations in a nation's economic activity without intervention by the government or policymakers on an individual basis. The best-known automatic stabilizers are corporate and personal taxes, and transfer systems such as unemployment insurance and welfare. Automatic stabilizers are so called because they act to stabilize economic cycles and are automatically triggered without explicit government action.

Read more: Automatic Stabilizer Automatic Stabilizer
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

yeah? stabilizers? -------like egg yolks and lecithin?

No, I mean like unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in our at-will employment States.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm going to go more with the former, than the latter.

Coolridge cut taxes BAM the great depresssion of 1929.

Reagan cut taxes BAM the recession of 1982.

W. Bush cut taxes BAM the Great recession of 2007.


It seems there's absolutely no evidence that cutting taxes does much of anything positive for the economy.

It seems quite the opposite, we have more evidence that cutting taxes cause recessions.

Which could make a ton of sense, considering when the rich get tax cuts, they tend to buy up housing investments, and stocks causing a inflated market, which bursts into a bad economy AKA Boom & Bust cycle.



Even Libertarians like Austrian economist Hayek have spoken of Boom & Bust cycle, by Hayek's own account he theorized that cutting interest rates inflated the market investment, forming a Boom & Bust cycle.

Now, expland that to NOT JUST cutting interest rates, but also cutting taxes, and you're having very similar over-inflation of the market.

Promoting the general welfare means public policies should engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy.

Tax cut economics is a simple red herring if you omit the rest of budget like, Spending.

Sure general welfare may have a positive effect on the lazy, but then again we know you libs get confused when it comes to any type of 'gender'.

Persons.