Redstate

... the other great thing about the Laffer curve is that's it's a very easy concept to explain to males between the ages of 15 and 35. I'll let y'all figure out why (wink).

Hang all traitors and secessionists! Hang them high!
- Me

Thought I saw that somewhere last week.

It would certainly help my view of McCain. I think Laffer is great. He is often on Larry Kudlow's show, which has become one of my favorites. We need more optimism in this country.

Finally. Something that explains that all tax cuts don't pay for themselves -- that they need to be paired with spending cuts as well.

Now how about a video about how wealth is created through productivity gains and with stagnant productivity all the government can do is move around wealth. When we have millions of people who can work sitting around collecting welfare, that is potential productivity gains being unrealized, and why that is not only bad for them, but for the country itself. That would also explain why automation that results in job losses is actually good for the economy as a whole, which is good for everyone. (Sucks for those laid off, but we all need to adapt). This is another concept I have difficulty convincing some people about.

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/MacroeconomicAnalysisofFairTax.pdf

------------------------------------------------
Eliminate the IRS and all payroll taxes! http://www.fairtax.org

A whole range of modern economists, led by Mankiw, now debate the Laffer curve. Not so much that it exists but that it is very , very, asymptotic.

In other words, they say that yes, if you approach nearly 100% taxation, then tax revenues will fall off as economic activity ceases. But the reverse is not true, cutting taxes in anything like the normal range does not give enough economic activity to pay for itself.

I do not agree. I think we can show real world examples. 1963, 1982, and capital gains in 1997, which clearly indicate that tax revenues as increased due to growth.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

Thanks for the video.

Someone is going to have to make a video of the "Crier Curve" for liberals, which is just the opposite shape of the Laffer Curve:

When taxes are low, increasing them slightly has a marginal effect on revenue because liberals are so depressed that taxes are low they just can't bring themselves to work harder. When taxes are high, they get a gleam in their eye and become bright eyed and bushy tailed and work much harder to give their money to the government, because they want the government to have it all, since it's for the best.

That's why these explanations and expostulations of the Laffer curve never work on left/liberals and why it will still be the same debate raging 2000 years from now.

as well as parts two and three, should be the one shown in schools in place of Al Gore's panic attack.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

Interesting but realistically what tax rate is position B? It is an unproven subjective percent at which people decide to try and dodge taxes. If position B is 70% than taxes can be raised to that point.

Also should government's goal be to maximize revenues in the first place? Budget restraint would due away with the need to always maximize revenues.