Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (14611)	6/10/2002 5:19:27 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The Clinton years in the US is only one example, and there was more going on then just the tax increase which wasn't really the largest tax increase ever. Calling it the biggest tax increase increase ever was mostly just a tactic by Republicans to bash Clinton. As a percentage of GDP it was not the largest tax increase ever. Also the rates where not the largest ever, not even close. The higher tax rates probably did slow economic growth in the US, but the rates did not go so high as to really be a disaster. The effect of the tax increase was negative but the effects of deregulation (much of it under Reagan) and improvments in technology (and in techniques to effectivly utilize the technology), and monetary factors all had a more powerful effect on the economy then the tax increases. If you look at Western Europe which has higher tax rates, you'll find that the savings rate is higher than the US. And higher unemployment, and lower GDP per capita. The higher taxes and a higher level or regulation in Europe have made them less wealthy then they would have been without these things. The increased savings makes up some of the difference but is not enough to make up for all of the difference. Tim