May 14, 2007
The angry left has no time to spend even considering the argument that what they call "tax cuts for the rich" are in fact tax cuts for the economy.Nor is the idea new that tax cuts can sometimes spur economic growth, resulting in more jobs for workers and higher earnings for business, leading to more tax revenue for the government.
A highly regarded economist once observed that "taxation may be so high as to defeat its object," so that sometimes "a reduction of taxation will run a better chance, than an increase, of balancing the Budget."
Who said that? Milton Friedman? Arthur Laffer? No. It was said in 1933 by John Maynard Keynes, a liberal icon.
Lower tax rates have led to higher tax revenues many times, both before and since Keynes' statement -- the Kennedy tax cuts in the 1960s, the Reagan tax cuts in the 1980s, and the recent Bush tax cuts that have led to record high tax revenues this April.
Now given the constant cries of Democrats to raise taxes, are we to assume that they want the government -- and the economy as a whole -- to operate on less tax revenue? Or that they simply want to punish some folks by confiscating their wealth?
Posted by: Greg at
10:15 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 1 kb.
19 queries taking 0.0385 seconds, 28 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.