Batman, Beyond actually caring about our fellow man and not wanting him to go off the tracks completely you're just such a softy. Now just to make it clear: you are in Houston TX; it is now January 1, year 2013; and, this is especially hard, Tuesday; and probably when you get up it will be day time. Happy New Year Also to Major, Mathloom, Bigtexx (now I am being a softy) etc. etc. etc.
Fixing our out of control debt is going to require both meaningful tax increases and meaningful spending cuts. Attacking one side of the equation and ignoring the other will not fix the problem. Until both sides of the aisle understand this premise and act accordingly, the problem will continue to be there.
So let's set the tax rate to zero, right? Revenue will be unaffected. And I'm not listening to Doogie for national finance "laws." Come on, man. Seriously, anyone with the slightest mathematical inclination knows it depends directly on the tax base and the tax rate. You're just wasting everyone's time, again. Refman nails it.
You didn't look up Hauser's Law. Here i will link it for you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hauser%27s_law Laffer Curve also says you are wrong (not about the 0%). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
First off, the Laffer Curve is a joke. Second, it doesn't disprove what he said because there is still half the curve where increasing tax rates also increases revenue.
Did you read your own link? The criticisms of said "law" (aka, an idea someone proposed) are far better than the support of it. It does no such thing unless you know where on the curve you're on. But since no one has ever actually determined the shape of the curve, it is 100% worthless. Everyone knows that a 0% tax rate and a 100% tax rate will generate $0 in revenues. And since we know a 30% tax rate generates revenues, that means, by definition, changing tax rates changes the revenues that government brings in, and thus definitively affects the deficit.
Besides which - if you believe in the Laffer curve, it completely invalidates your idea that tax rate doesn't affect revenues. The Laffer Curve's who point is that changing the tax rate affects the revenue brought in.
li'l t is bitter because the Republicans in the Senate just collapsed on their holy vow not to raise taxes and got zilch in return. Obama rolled them up like a big fat spliff. Looks like his time with the Choom gang was well spent.
The Laffer curve is worth laughing about when most experts see the tipping point at around 70% marginal tax rates, or in any case, higher than what they are now. The Panel--- http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/participants for those interested.
Always makes me laugh when someone posts something that essentially counters their own argument. And more often than not, its someone on the right that makes that blunder...
Whatever they will ultimately pass will predictably be a smoke and mirrors meaningless piece of crap that won't address any systemic problem. The real problem is that it is easy to wastefully spend other peoples money. The Government is addicted to this practice. Until spending is curtailed taxes will just keep going up. Between my income taxes, my property taxes, sales taxes, licenses, and a host of other fees, I am essentially working for the governments that control my properties. I pay more in monthly taxes for my house than most people pay on their mortgages or rent. It is truly absurd. I just don't understand why so many people on this board just seem to be overjoyed with this arrangement. Are most of you guys living with your parents or something?
Good God, you're dense. Increased revenues lower the deficit every single time. It is mathematics, you should have learned what you need to know about that equation by about 3rd grade.
Everyone did, it is called "compromise" and it isn't a dirty word to anyone but idiots. Yes, most greedy people are, but I can't imagine you would be. There is no way that you make enough to see a tax hike. I'd rather have a tax and spend Democrat than a borrow and spend Republican any day. Yes, both of which are the result of the intransigence of greedy, stupid people who have been snowed by the Fox echo chamber. You know, like you.
While I agree with their conclusion, economic forecasting is notoriously difficult and the results are often pathetic. I wonder how much overlap there is between this panel of experts and the one in December 2007 that confidently predicted for the WSJ that there would be no recession in 2008.
tax hikes do not necessarily equal increased revenue (at least if you are talking about income tax). followed by blah blah blah you're stupid blah blah blah.
That statement is very different than your original claims: tax hikes don't reduce the deficit. revenue is a function of GDP not tax rate.
