That was Mr. Laffer of the Laffer Curve, right? I guess there are no rich people in New York City because of the high taxes, right? Those Park Avenue condos are all occupied by welfare queens I suppose.
There’s nothing wrong with the Laffer Curve. The problem is that the right is making an assumption about which side of the curve we’re on. Looking at the economic data from the last several decades, one might be led to the conclusion that raising taxes boosts economic productivity. Which is not very surprising: money, like any form of stored energy, only does work when it is moving, and the tax-spend cycle does move a lot of money.
Well, I read, in Scientific American I believe, that there is no a priori reason to believe that the curve has just one peak. For instance, the curve might look like an inverted W. The only sure points are that revenue is zero at 0% and at 100%.
Pretty much. The problem with economics is that, like creationism, most economic theory is ideology masquerading as science. When there are actual experiments with proper controls — just for starters — that will be a step in the right direction. Until then, most economic thought is idle speculation at best and wishful thinking with a dash of malice at worst.
One thing I’ve long wanted to see are competing social and economic programs being launched with randomly selected participants, or at least divided between regions of the country. The one that works best then gets rolled out nationally, and future experiments attempt to improve upon it.
It certainly doesn’t work for thr rich people, although I’m still all for it 🙂
on May 19, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Wasn’t the federal tax on the ultra-rich over 90% during the Eisenhower years? Didn’t like the music or fashion from back then but the government was running a surplus.
As far as rich people moving out of states that tax them, good. Get their raggedy asses out of California.
Of course, today here in California I am faced with a ballot of really, really bad propositions that take money away from school teachers and the mentally ill and childcare in order to preserve low tax rates for the wealthy. This is miserable, but maybe it’s the death throes for the Republes here in Cali.
That was Mr. Laffer of the Laffer Curve, right? I guess there are no rich people in New York City because of the high taxes, right? Those Park Avenue condos are all occupied by welfare queens I suppose.
There’s nothing wrong with the Laffer Curve. The problem is that the right is making an assumption about which side of the curve we’re on. Looking at the economic data from the last several decades, one might be led to the conclusion that raising taxes boosts economic productivity. Which is not very surprising: money, like any form of stored energy, only does work when it is moving, and the tax-spend cycle does move a lot of money.
Well, I read, in Scientific American I believe, that there is no a priori reason to believe that the curve has just one peak. For instance, the curve might look like an inverted W. The only sure points are that revenue is zero at 0% and at 100%.
Pretty much. The problem with economics is that, like creationism, most economic theory is ideology masquerading as science. When there are actual experiments with proper controls — just for starters — that will be a step in the right direction. Until then, most economic thought is idle speculation at best and wishful thinking with a dash of malice at worst.
One thing I’ve long wanted to see are competing social and economic programs being launched with randomly selected participants, or at least divided between regions of the country. The one that works best then gets rolled out nationally, and future experiments attempt to improve upon it.
Agreed
maybe they’ll all go galt…like neil barsky, stevenD’s favorite hedge fund manager…
©Matt Mahurin
sometimes “Stupidity is better kept a secret than displayed.”
[Heraclitus of Ephesus]
methinks now would be one of those times.
It certainly doesn’t work for thr rich people, although I’m still all for it 🙂
Wasn’t the federal tax on the ultra-rich over 90% during the Eisenhower years? Didn’t like the music or fashion from back then but the government was running a surplus.
As far as rich people moving out of states that tax them, good. Get their raggedy asses out of California.
Of course, today here in California I am faced with a ballot of really, really bad propositions that take money away from school teachers and the mentally ill and childcare in order to preserve low tax rates for the wealthy. This is miserable, but maybe it’s the death throes for the Republes here in Cali.