« Edwards: Unrealistic and unconstitutional | Main | Cohen brings back third party hype »

November 14, 2007

Comments

These arguments (that reducing taxes increases economic growth) have just a shadow of validity. A tax cut is a stimulus - it gives people more money to spend.

But drawing some short term correlation between budget cuts and changes in the deficit is really without merit. Economic cycles have their own lives - independent of tax tax policies - and have a much much larger impact on the level of deficits (or surpluses).

This argument says that "deficits don't matter" and that they are, in essence, caused simply by taxing people.

I also laugh at the argument that higher taxes will lead to high income earners choosing to be less productive.

And what exactly is an "involuntary tax hike" ? Perhaps he meant to say "shifting the tax burden..." The Rangel plan is revenue neutral. It doesn't increase over all-tax revenue. That is a point that is ignored over and over again in this recent barrage of editorials.

"The Rangel plan is revenue neutral. It doesn't increase over all-tax revenue. That is a point that is ignored over and over again in this recent barrage of editorials."

Only on a piece of paper and in a static behavioral world is Rangel's plan revenue neutral. If economics teaches us anything it teaches us that people will change their economic behavior when you start screwing with the tax structure, especially the wealthy.

Macquechoux -

The proposal is not a tax increase. To call it a tax increase is a misrepresentation.

If you want to argue that changing (redistributing) the tax burden will have some negative general economic impact (lessening total revenue) go ahead and try to show that that is the case.

It seems to me that it is just as important to get the lower wage earners to work harder as it is to get the already rich to work harder. Why do conservatives think that only the upper managers are affected by higher wages. Lets give the rich more money so they will work harder but keep the minimum wage low so the actual workers will work less? I don't get it.

The comments to this entry are closed.