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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (530282)	11/18/2009 1:09:03 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1576923

I think there should be a special DINK tax. Here, these couples are enjoying the fruits of America, while not contributing a generation to the future, and causing us to import one.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (530282)	11/18/2009 1:18:32 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576923

"CJ, if the Laffer Curve is wrong, then Obama should just tax our way to prosperity, just like Clinton supposedly did." Is this an attempt to pack in as many intellectual dishonest arguments into a single sentence as possible? I never said it was wrong, just meaningless. Sure, you can concoct a curve, the end points are not in dispute and it seems reasonable that there is some sort of curve in between. But unless you can actually put numbers to it, it is pretty useless. And the only way to put numbers to it is to analyze past data. Once you change the tax rates or the economy changes, the curve changes and there is no way to determine the curve until after the fact. So it has no predictive value at all. Which Laffer himself says. As a result, using it as a basis of tax policy is, well, crazy. Two, no one claimed that Clinton taxed our way to prosperity. That is just another of your patented straw men. What did happen was that increasing taxes did not kill economic activity. The best that can be argued is that it might have been better with lower taxes. And it probably would have been, deficit spending always stimulates the economy. Of course, dealing with the resulting debt is a different issue...