Re: LVT dustup over at AngryBear


William F Hummel wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 19:27:16 GMT, Folsom Inmate <nomail@xxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> >Supply-siders are wrong, there is no statistical correlation between
> >economic growth and taxation. Growth happens despite taxation. I believe
> >taxation spurs economic growth because the government always spends
> >taxes, which in turn disperses money among corporations, supply chains
> >and individuals, who in turn purchase goods and services, which
> >stimulates more hiring, spendings, taxing, and so on. OTOH, supply-side
> >economics concentrates money into few hands, drying up demand among the
> >lower-income population and ultimately causing economic contraction.
>
> I thoroughly agree. Supply side theory is based on the false belief
> that economic growth is dependent on the investments of the wealthy.
> Accordingly, taxes should not bear too heavily on those in high income
> group. In truth there is an enormous pool of funds comprising the
> savings of the broad middle class -- pension funds, mutual funds,
> insurance companies, finance companies, and so forth. They are all
> seeking good investment opportunities. Furthermore, banks can issue
> credit money limited only by a multiple of their own capital. No
> recessions since WW2 can be traced to a shortage of investment funds.

How did you arrive at this conclusion?

> Tax revenues don't disappear into a black hole. They are a part of
> the reciprocal flow of funds between the government and the private
> sector. Government spending spurs economic growth if the funds are
> used to provide essential services and to improve the infrastructure.
> Even boondoggles have an upside. They support aggregate demand, which
> is not a bad thing when the economy runs well below its potential.

Wouldn't the stagflation of the 70's indicate that there was plenty on
the demand side and not enough on the supply side?

> We've known that demand is the key since at least the days of
> J.M.Keynes. Economic activity and growth is greatest when purchasing
> power is broadly spread, as it was in the 20 years following WW2.
> That means the broad middle class should be taxed at the lowest
> possible rate. The downside to high tax rates on upper incomes is
> that it spawns an army of lawyers and accountants working
> (unproductively) to create tax shelters and to work Congress for
> special deals in the tax code.
>
> The maximum rate should never again be set as high as it once was, but
> I think the tax burden should be shifted towards the upper income end.
> For the past couple of decades, there has been little or no growth in
> real purchasing power in the lower 4 quintiles

How do you arrive at this conclusion?

2003 real incomes (latest figure I found on Census.gov):
Bottom Q.: $17,984
Second Q.: $34,000
Third Q.: $54,453
Fourth Q.:$86,867

....versus 1983 incomes (2 decades previous):
Bottom Q.: $15,769
Second Q.: $29,388
Third Q.: $45,061
Fourth Q.: $68,154

That's a 14% increase over 2 decades in real incomes for the bottom
quintile. For the third quintile, (the ever important middle class?),
the increase was 20%.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h01ar.html

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: LVT dustup over at AngryBear
    ... the idea that chronic unemployment is a problem best solved ... it is the insistence of supply-siders that there ... is an inverse correlation between taxes and economic growth. ... economic growth and taxation. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: LVT dustup over at AngryBear
    ... it is the insistence of supply-siders that there ... >>is an inverse correlation between taxes and economic growth. ... income from capital gains taxed at 28%. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: LVT dustup over at AngryBear
    ... >Supply-siders are wrong, there is no statistical correlation between ... >taxation spurs economic growth because the government always spends ... >economics concentrates money into few hands, ... In truth there is an enormous pool of funds comprising the ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: LVT dustup over at AngryBear
    ... it is the insistence of supply-siders that there ... >is an inverse correlation between taxes and economic growth. ... Growth happens despite taxation. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: LVT dustup over at AngryBear
    ... >>If anything is absurd, it is the insistence of supply-siders that there ... >>is an inverse correlation between taxes and economic growth. ...
    (sci.econ)