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: RetiredNow who wrote (530697)	11/19/2009 1:48:14 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574848

MM Please don't cite factcheck.org as some kind of authority. It is a liberal organization with an agenda, and is a collection of a few rank amateurs on these subjects. I have no interest in arguing the subject with you. At no time have you admitted you were wrong about anything. You're not going to start now.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (530697)	11/19/2009 11:07:14 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574848

A tax increase in 1942 boosted federal revenues by 71%, for example, as the US geared up for war after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Real boosts are hard to measure in WWII since price controls and rationing mess up "real measurements". Still in nominal terms, and I'd also say in real term revenue did increase but Post hoc doesn't imply propter hoc. The economy was recovering, which generates more revenue. Also the federal government discontinued some other negative policies at about the same time or before it raised taxes. Revenue may have increased less than it otherwise would have because of the tax increase. Also consider that in time of near total war people probably where somewhat less motivated to avoid taxation, so WWII examples are presenting special cases. In the period since 1968, the study said, "the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 was the biggest increase." Others would dispute that, but I'll accept it for the sake of argument. OK it was a big tax increase, but it was preceded by a bigger tax cut. The net effect over the period was a tax cut, even in terms of the total effective tax burden, and particularly in terms of nominal rates which effect the incentives people face. The factors that countered the net rate cut where closing of credits and deductions, which even though it increased the net tax burden reduced the distortion of the incentives people faced.