Time for more tax cuts!Follow

Well, let me know when you want to get serious about it.

Probably about the same time the Dems want to get serious about cuts.

When they are, I will.

They aren't though. Only if you look purely at the top marginal income tax rate can you even remotely make this statement. And the trend leader isn't the current tax rates. It's the current spending rates which are alarming. In just the last few years, spending has increased from ~19-20% of GDP to ~24-25%. Barring a change in our spending taxes will have to make up that difference somehow.

That's why some of us are talking about taxes even though they haven't gone up recently. It's not what they are at right now, but what they will be if we do nothing.

So your argument is that this plan will work regardless of unemployment and economic activity driving increased revenue?

You didn't think that through, did you?


So your argument is that this plan will work regardless of unemployment and economic activity driving increased revenue?

You didn't think that through either, did you?

Rather hysterically, the Heritage Foundation never changed any numbers besides their unemployment figures. Apparently they believe that things such as tax revenue, business development and home development aren't connected to unemployment. But that's a mighty great plan they marked up there!

Edited, May 26th 2011 5:22pm by Jophiel

I'm all for removing subsidies.

Excellent. Go spread the word to the GOP rank and file who hyperventilate at the thought of companies paying additional taxes when their subsidies are gone.

Well, you can start with the GOP rank and file right here :)

See! I'm a helper!

Yes. Because those factors are part of a feedback process. The point is the direction you are going Joph. Not hitting those ideal numbers just means that it may take longer to meet specific debt/deficit reduction goals.



Yes, I did. Because I understand the difference between saying something like: "We can afford to buy this new boat as long as I get a 5% wage increase and maximum bonus each year" and "If we don't buy any new stuff and I'm able to keep my job, we'll be able to pay off our credit card bills in X amount of time". In the first case, if the required conditions aren't met you can't afford what you're buying. That's what the Democrats did. In the second case, even if you don't hit the ideal goals, you're still reducing your debt. It just may take longer. That's what the Ryan plan is about.




Yes. Absolutely. What part of that don't you understand? I suspect you think that unemployment is the direct and sole determinant of economic growth and revenue. That's simply not the case. It's a byproduct of those things and does act in a way to help keep them going (that whole feedback thing I mentioned), but you don't create economic growth just by hiring more people. It's only when there's demand for the labor that this works. That's a typical liberal mistake though.

Economic growth will occur as a result of the government getting out of the way of businesses making money. I know that's a hard pill for the left to swallow, but that's what actually works. Let people make choices and then let them profit or fail as a result of those choices, and you'll find more people taking more risks and thus more economic activity. This will *cause* more employment and generate more revenue even without raising taxes.

Couple that with caps on spending (and some spending cuts), and you can whittle away the debt over time.

Look. I'm not a huge fan of the Ryan plan. But that's almost certainly for different reasons than you. I don't think it goes far enough or works fast enough. It is, as Moe said, a step in the right direction though. I'd prefer we undo a ton of spending done over the last few years in order to bring spending down quickly to manageable levels. But I also recognize that that would meet even stronger resistance from the guys on your side of the fence as Ryan's plan is.



Yeah. I did as well. You and I simply differ 180 degrees on our view of how economic growth is created. Which is not surprising, since it's the same broad difference between conservative and liberal economic policy in general. Nothing new here really.



I can't speak for the Heritage Foundation Joph. Maybe that 2.8% figure was a typo or something. Um... But I'm reasonably sure that they don't think that success of the Ryan plan hinges on reaching 2.8% unemployment. In fact, I'm sure that's just something you (or more likely some liberal source you're parroting) decided to assume. You do understand that it's the left who assume that consumption and consumption alone fuels economic growth, right?

The right understands that consumption only results in growth if the source of consumption is itself already part of that growth. It's why handing money to people so they can buy stuff with it never works. You're basically letting your own flawed understanding of economics lead you to incredibly false conclusions. Employment is the result of increased (real) economic growth. It has a modest positive feedback effect, but that's it.

That's your best response? Just dismiss a differing opinion with a laugh? Why? How's the Obama economic plan working? Not so great, is it? How many times do conservatives have to be right about economics before you stop just dismissing our ideas without considering them? And you wonder why I keep speculating that so many of you have been freaking brainwashed. It could have something to do with brainless responses like this.



They don't "rely on" a feedback loop though. Not for a general trend of economic recovery. That's where you keep going off the rails. They rely on a government policy favorable to business to encourage private business to expand their operations. This will cause both economic growth *and* increased employment. The exact employment numbers aren't as important as the direction we're going in.



Because, as I've explained three times now, those numbers aren't necessary for the other results to occur. It's a prediction of employment that will result *from* those other things, not the other way around. They can pull it out and it doesn't affect the other numbers at all. I just don't know how to explain this to you in more clear language so that you can understand. I know you want this to be some conspiracy or something, but it's really not.



So. You went off on you own to the Heritage site and read their report on your own? Or you heard some liberal source making hay about how the Ryan plan "relies on" unemployment dropping to 2.8% and repeated that here? I'm going to assume the latter. And I'm right, aren't I?

Yeah cause giving already rich people more money to stow in offshore, tax havens totally creates jobs...

Don't you know that the only way for countries to pay off their debt is to have 0% tax rates? Everyone knows less taxes means more revenue for government. If only we had a 0% tax rate the debt would be paid off in just a few short years!

Edited, May 26th 2011 5:17pm by Olorinus