So going back to the question posed in the thread title, the short answer is that they don't.
Logic and common sense would tell you that. This is why the whole issue of tax cuts paying for themselves is referred to as "voodoo economics", because it defies reason and logic.
The trade off for paying taxes is living in a first world country. Infrastructure, law and order, and regulatory agencies to protect intellectual property, investment, and consumers, all cost money. So does good government. Right wingers want all of these benefits, but they don't want to pay for them.
They also want a strong, modern, well equipped military who will jump in and protect "American interests", but they don't want to provide veterans with health care and the other things they promised soldiers when they enlisted.
There are countries which have no income tax. They are not places that any person who has become accustomed to first world comforts, infrastructure or security would want to live, but they do exist. You have to look out for your own security and hire bodyguards. You'll have to purify own water too. And you'll have to bribe government officials to keep them from stealing what you have, but you won't have to pay income tax.
Right wingers like to promote the notion that taxation is theft, but it's not. Taxation is your share of the costs of running maintaining a first world country. Just like you pay for your electrical bill, your heating bill and your water bill, your tax bill is your share of infrastructure and expenses.
I also strongly disagree with the notion that corporations which provide jobs should have lower taxes. In fact these corporations use more infrastructure and government resources than individuals. They need an educated workforce. They need transportation for their goods and services. Their waste disposal costs are very high. They need protection for their intellectual property and investments. Giving these corporations tax breaks simply shifts their costs onto individual middle-class Americans who are already bearing a disproportionately high percentage of the cost of running the government.
Progressive taxation results in unpayable debt... fact
Because progressives can only take so much money from others… Then it runs out.
So going back to the question posed in the thread title, the short answer is that they don't.
Logic and common sense would tell you that. This is why the whole issue of tax cuts paying for themselves is referred to as "voodoo economics", because it defies reason and logic.
The trade off for paying taxes is living in a first world country. Infrastructure, law and order, and regulatory agencies to protect intellectual property, investment, and consumers, all cost money. So does good government. Right wingers want all of these benefits, but they don't want to pay for them.
They also want a strong, modern, well equipped military who will jump in and protect "American interests", but they don't want to provide veterans with health care and the other things they promised soldiers when they enlisted.
There are countries which have no income tax. They are not places that any person who has become accustomed to first world comforts, infrastructure or security would want to live, but they do exist. You have to look out for your own security and hire bodyguards. You'll have to purify own water too. And you'll have to bribe government officials to keep them from stealing what you have, but you won't have to pay income tax.
Right wingers like to promote the notion that taxation is theft, but it's not. Taxation is your share of the costs of running maintaining a first world country. Just like you pay for your electrical bill, your heating bill and your water bill, your tax bill is your share of infrastructure and expenses.
I also strongly disagree with the notion that corporations which provide jobs should have lower taxes. In fact these corporations use more infrastructure and government resources than individuals. They need an educated workforce. They need transportation for their goods and services. Their waste disposal costs are very high. They need protection for their intellectual property and investments. Giving these corporations tax breaks simply shifts their costs onto individual middle-class Americans who are already bearing a disproportionately high percentage of the cost of running the government.
Progressive taxation results in unpayable debt... fact
Because progressives can only take so much money from others… Then it runs out.
That's a total falsehood, Ivan. Republicans paint themselves as the party of fiscal entirely responsibility, but like so many other Republican positions, it's a total lie. How can you be fiscally responsible while cutting taxes and spending like drunken sailors?
Democrats are the party of Tax and Spend, but notice that they tax BEFORE they spend so that their expenditures are covered by revenues.
Carter balanced the budget, during difficult economic times. Reagan cut taxes and created the biggest deficit in history, to that point.
Everyone thought Reagan had created an economic miracle but it was a little like your neighbour painting and landscaping his house, buying a new car, getting new furniture, all on borrowed money. It looked like the country was prosperous and successful, but it was all done on borrowed funds using voodoo economics. The tax cuts didn't create jobs and it didn't pay for itself. Reagan has a worse job creation record than Carter, Clinton or Obama.
Clinton raised taxes and balanced the budget. He also created jobs. Then along came W. Taking a page from Reagan's book, and completely ignoring the fact that Reagan recanted voodoo economics and raised taxes to try to cover his deficits, W gave huge tax cuts to the wealthy and went on a spending spree, starting two wars. Unlike Reagan, who at least spent his deficit at home where the money stayed within the US economy, W spent it overseas, making war in the Middle East.
Making matters worse, in order to buy seniors' votes, W came up with Medicare Part D, with creating a tax to pay for it. When the economy crashed and burned as a result of his fiscal irresponsibility, W handed off the whole steaming pile of shit to Barrack Obama and slunk out of Washington.
Obama was handed the worst economy since the Great Depression and through careful management was able to right a sinking and drain the deficit that was taking it down, but it was a long slow process, especially since Republicans refused to allow Bush's tax cuts to expire.
So now Republicans want to make massive tax cuts, again. I guess they figure that the third time is the charm. And they're using voodoo economics saying the tax cuts will pay for themselves. All of this meets the very definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Nobody has ever accused the Republicans or those who vote for them of being smart.
