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: Alighieri who wrote (679303)	10/17/2012 10:49:01 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572946

...the best you could do is conclude that other more powerful forces have far more impact on the economy Precisely. Now it is possible that the tax rate can have a significant influence, but it has to be a pretty extreme change. Taking the top tax bracket from 35% to, say, 90% would probably have an economic impact. From 35% to 39%, a dubious proposition at best. Sadly, after decades of pushing Koch brother's propaganda, a lot of Americans just don't understand how our economy operates.

To: Alighieri who wrote (679303)	10/17/2012 2:27:47 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572946

clinton's tax increase was followed by a long and unprecedented period of prosperity (and, more directly causal, a budget surplus) Actually, Clinton's tax increases in the early 90s served to slow growth over what would have been expected coming out of the recession. One can easily see that the real surge in growth occurred AFTER Clinton reduced taxes in his second term. As to what "caused" the near surplus (there was never a surplus), there were three causes and each shared about 1/3 of the responsibility: (a) The Peace Dividend from Reagan winning the Cold War, (b) the increased economic growth resulting from the tax cuts, and (c) reduced spending resulting from the Contract With America. while bush's tax cuts preceded an economic collapse... You might also want to refer to tax revenue by year: Economic collapse or not, it is clear that Clinton's tax cuts as well as Bush's tax cuts both resulted in huge revenue surges. I just don't know how anyone can argue otherwise given the above.