Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
If Hauser can make broad sweeping conclusions in his chart, I wanna do the same:
Call it Dux Deduces...that supply side economics is a FAILED economic theory...each time it was applied (1981-1989, 2001-2008) with massive tax cuts, US national debt as a percent of GDP rose significantly:
It is as clear as black and red.... as income tax rates are adjusted down on the top wage earners, national debt increases as percent of GDP.
|
Your attempts at confusing Hauser's data is pretty funny. I think you can understand the point, but you choose to attempt to add confusion because you don't seem to agree with the implications of the data.
To be clear, all Hauser's graph is showing is that there is no correlation between top marginal income tax rates and tax revenues as a percentage of GDP. However, there is a correlation between tax revenues collected and GDP. If you grow the economy, you can grow government spending without amassing debt.
I will give you a hint. If you want to prove something that contradicts the implications of Hauser's graph - you need to show there is no correlation between tax revenues and GDP. Which you can not do. Or, you need to show that high marginal tax rates are more correlated to GDP growth than the inverse. You can not do that either. And since we know you can not do it, please find your most liberal minded, anti-supply side economist and have him or her join the discussion then perhaps we can move away from the humor. "Dux Deduces", ha, ha, ha, you are pretty funny.
{added} Just to show I read your link.
Here is a tidbit from the CBO analysis:
Quote:
CBO’s analysis begins with an estimate, provided by the
Joint Committee on Taxation, of conventional revenue
effects. Those estimates assume that tax changes do not
affect gross domestic product, but they incorporate
changes in taxable income that can occur with a fixed
level of gross domestic product (GDP).
|
Why would they assume that??? Perhaps to make the math easier?