Yes, because taxes create jobs... Oh, no wait. Taxes actually reduce liquid assets in the private economy, thereby reducing productive potential. I think you misunderstand Sowell's point. Your approach assumes he is saying that it's not technically feasible to tax the rich. What Sowell has always stated is higher tax rates usually garner decreased revenue. For instance, the rich can afford to quit working or invest in tax shelters and they did (which is the point of historical analysis).
Why do the left keep going back to Clinton? They always omit the fact he severely cut defense spending which helped balance the budget but left the military wanting! He also had a republican house who kept spending down. Also don't forget the .com bubble. Just leftist looking for a excuse to tax and spend.
A gross oversimplification. No one payed so high taxes, the revenue remained stable. He does not undermine hes case. If you think that government can create jobs better then the private sector despite having much weaker incentives, then yes tax job creators. Well he do not believe in the post office. But of course we need 3x more expensive green jobs and infrastructure project that will be come to fruition after 7 years, because the workers will spend the money dividing less goods to more people
This video is a joke. You don't address Sowell's central point, which is that higher tax rates do not necessarily lead to higher revenues. You don't establish that the Clinton-era tax rates were responsible for full employment. You don't even talk about the effects of differing tax rates or how increased government revenues lead to Clinton-era prosperity.
Yes, because taxes create jobs... Oh, no wait. Taxes actually reduce liquid assets in the private economy, thereby reducing productive potential. I think you misunderstand Sowell's point. Your approach assumes he is saying that it's not technically feasible to tax the rich. What Sowell has always stated is higher tax rates usually garner decreased revenue. For instance, the rich can afford to quit working or invest in tax shelters and they did (which is the point of historical analysis).
YtseWolf7 1 month ago
This guy's a moron
goraikkonen2011 4 months ago
Why do the left keep going back to Clinton? They always omit the fact he severely cut defense spending which helped balance the budget but left the military wanting! He also had a republican house who kept spending down. Also don't forget the .com bubble. Just leftist looking for a excuse to tax and spend.
wordfaith77840 4 months ago
A gross oversimplification. No one payed so high taxes, the revenue remained stable. He does not undermine hes case. If you think that government can create jobs better then the private sector despite having much weaker incentives, then yes tax job creators. Well he do not believe in the post office. But of course we need 3x more expensive green jobs and infrastructure project that will be come to fruition after 7 years, because the workers will spend the money dividing less goods to more people
serialkiller1990 5 months ago
this guy is a clown.. no good lier
portorock123 5 months ago
This video is a joke. You don't address Sowell's central point, which is that higher tax rates do not necessarily lead to higher revenues. You don't establish that the Clinton-era tax rates were responsible for full employment. You don't even talk about the effects of differing tax rates or how increased government revenues lead to Clinton-era prosperity.
Basically you don't know how to think.
jsgoodfella 5 months ago 2
Fine with me lets bring the Clinton speding rates back as well
sintruder 5 months ago