Tax Cut

[MentalAtheist]

This Video is a joke...

But to understand why you need to know that there is a fix amount of wealth in the world at any given time. Meaning that if the government needs 3-trillion dollors, there is a fix number that will need to be taxed.

The idea that wildly differing percentages can be taxed "15%-65%" to get the same number of 3-trillion is the most idiotic idea I've ever heard.

Low taxes makes more money for the government!?

You know a Conservative is lying when they try using math.

[PacificBallroomDance]

@MentalAtheist

Nobody knows exactly what the Laffer curve looks like. 15% and 65% were just examples.

It is undeniable that if the tax rate was set to zero that the government would get nothing. It is also undeniable that nobody would work for nothing (unless forced to do so and that is called slavery) so if the tax rate were set to 100% the government would still get nothing.

It is possible to raise taxes so high that revenue goes down.

Engage that on an intellectual level or go away.

[MentalAtheist]

@PacificBallroomDance

Your point that no one would work if taxes were 100% is out right faults. In many cultures and religions owning wealth was a bad thing. People would be given a “Guardianship” position rather then an “Ownership” position when it came to having wealth.

Lords and King have set up such systems that have lasted hundreds of years! Maybe you wouldn't work with a $100 tax rate but I wouldn't be so arrogant as to declare that no one would.

◄♦ Continued ♦►

[MentalAtheist]

@MentalAtheist Ooops

"Maybe you wouldn't work with a $100"

thats should be %100 tax rate ^_^

[TheRockeieio]

@MentalAtheist

It is spelled "false".

So I presume that you would work for nothing. Your IQ is commensurate with what is expected of liberals.

No free man would work for nothing with an IQ above 70.

When you can cobble together a cogent argument, come on back and we can have an intelligent discussion.

[MentalAtheist]

@TheRockeieio

Ouch... An Ad-hominem attack! Sorry for not being a spell-Nazi.

You know, ownership over wealth isn't the only motivator. And it wouldn't matter if it was, because that wasn't my main point. My main point was that the “Laffer curve” is a poor and dishonest way of looking at the economy.

The Laffer Curve would have you believe (among other things) that government is the largest siphoner of wealth. Its not. Bank fraud, medical expenses, and insurances are #1

◄♦ Continued ♦►

[MentalAtheist]

@TheRockeieio

My 2nd main point is that, all wealth passes through the government at some-point. Meaning that over the course of 4-5 year, %100 of wealth will be taxed!

This is possible because, government money is recycled back to the very people from which it was taxed. Government taxation acts as the heart of the economy.

The richest are the largest siphoners of wealth and they aren't investing it back into the economy fast enough. This is what's choking the economy

◄♦ Continued ♦►

[PacificBallroomDance]

@MentalAtheist

Wealth is not fixed. Money is just a tool to facilitate trade. A farmer with a bumper crop is more wealth than one with a failed crop. When the McCormick Reaper was invented it did the work of 100 men. It automated a back breaking process and more could accomplished with less.

Earth moving equipment greatly reduced the effort required to build highway and those highway in turn reduced the cost of transporting goods to market.

Wealth is measured in products that can be sold.

[MentalAtheist]

@PacificBallroomDance

"Wealth is not fixed. Money is just a tool to facilitate trade"

When I say wealth is fixed, I'm only referring to a single moment in time. I said there is only so much wealth "AT ANY GIVEN TIME"

In a single moment you can't say truthfully that you only have $100 and $1100. It's only one, the other or Nether. For this reason 2 of your 3 comments are misguided. I never said wealth couldn't grow.

◄♦ Continued ♦►

[PacificBallroomDance]

@MentalAtheist

Continued from previous post.

Wealth, in a very real sense, is manufactured, mined or grown. As we become more efficient at these activities we can create even greater wealth.

A farmer takes a few seeds, adds water and fertilizer, and a great deal of work and can received 30 or 100 times the seed in return.

That is wealth creation.

[sactowncr1minal]

no matter what there need to be a flat tax, those men at the top dont spend that money they arent getting taxed. billions of american dollars are just SITTING in accounts in other countries. but u will never REALLY hear about it, nor will u ever admit to the possibility, because "CEOs are honest ppl". they are greedy. these men have planes they can ship CASH to switzerland and the us econ. will never see that money. ur response "thats a theory, no facts" but come on, i would, wouldnt u?

[bauler]

Great explanation of the Laffer Curve. Trouble is government just keeps spending more than it take in no matter how much that is. Its happening here in the state of California. Raise taxes, revenues go down. People who pay the taxes leave the state, finally the state goes broke.

[MentalAtheist]

@bauler

The problem with the Laffer Curve is that it would have you believe that government is the largest siphoner of wealth. Its not. Bank fraud, medical expenses, and insurances are #1. Government money is recycled back to the very people from which it was taxed.

The top 2% of America are the largest siphoners of wealth and aren't investing it back. People are having trouble making ends meet because of a lack of wealth in the system. But thats not the governments fault, it the top 2%.

[ccieboy]

just more hypothetical republican bullshit.

notice they don't tell you where the top of the curve is.

that's because nobody knows.

rich bastards that evade taxes are gonna' do so no matter what the tax rate is!

(republicans need enough ignorant people to get them elected).

[microcapmillionz]

Great video. True in every sense. The truth the democrats don't want ppl to know is that they don't care if gov't revenues go down...they just want more power and control over people's lives.

[TheNextTurn]

Yea give money to big powerful corporations and hope that falls to the poor, yet the poor never see it.

If you get your head out of you ass you see REALITY and notice that the economy is going down the shitter becuase of Bush.

[TheRockeieio]

Dear TheNextTurn,

If you want to contest the message contained in the video, by all means do so.

You have been blocked because of your use of profanity (didn't your mother ever tell you that profanity is disgusting?).

Address this issue using facts and data. Your reply was nothing more than a temper tantrum.

[ChipsShot]

@TheNextTurn Give a loyal American a chance to pull your head out of yours....Give a patriot an early Christmas present.

[aknotz]

Simply beautiful. Short, impactful, and to the point.

[erkd1]

Laffer, minion of Milton Friedman, has dazzled Supply Side Economists with his Laffer Curve for years. Since you arbitrarily placed a line through the curve to denote the amount of money the government needs, then what if you move that line to the apex, or above it, then what? Additionally, its a matter of who gets the tax cuts, if you goal is a broader base then reducing taxes on the middle and lower class, not the wealthy is the answer. Record deficits prove Free Market zealots to be wrong.

[TheRockeieio]

If the line is above the curve then it will be impossible for the government to raise the required revenue.

You cannot raise revenue by cutting taxes for people who do not pay taxes. The bottom 50% of wage earners pay only 5% of all taxes.

Record deficits are caused by excessive spending not free markets.

[erkd1]

In your video it says you need X amount of money, you can get it either by tax cuts or on the other end of the curve which is higher tax cuts. Now you say the reason it doesn't work is because the line is too high, there is not enough revenue. Well, thats certainly a problem, that means it doesn't work. And that makes sense, because every time we try it, we have record deficits. Stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time.

[TheRockeieio]

The video teaches a valid and true principle: you can raise tax rates high enough that they become counter productive and actually reduce revenues.

JFK, Reagan and Bush all cut taxes and revenues went up.

These are undeniable facts. The fact that some are impervious to truth and reason in no way alters these facts.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result.

Stupity is ignoring the truth and following a course that is known to be harmful.

[aknotz]

So if record deficits prove "free market zealots" to be wrong, then what does expanding government entitlements do? Not create deficits? Pick your favorite bankrupt government program... Social Security, medicare, et cetera.

[kempion]

Records deficits? As a percentage of GPD, deficits are in line with, or lower than, historical deficits.

Learn economincs before commenting.

[mashed107]

We're facing an inflationary recession because of failed fiscal policies. You can not cut taxes without cut spending, and a government -must- live within its means. Doing otherwise, leads to too much inflation, as what can't be taxed, is printed out of thin air. Oil has gone up 350% since 2001.

Your chart is correct, and lower taxes (w/ lower spending) is the best option, but who, republican or democrat, is going to cut back spending on entitlements and an extravagant foreign policy? No one!

[jgardner2004]

Great insight! People deride the Laffer curve, but it is the only logical explanation for why you raise $0 at both 0% and 100%, and some money in between.

I've certainly noticed that when it comes to issues, the democrats talk a great game but can't deliver any meaningful result except the same-old, same-old blather.