The Observation Deck

Will Brown wrote:But I think I will check out of this thread. Becker is, frankly, uncivil and offensive, to the extent that any good idea she had would be poisoned by her personality, and that is not an environment in which I want to live.

Wow, I must be really intimidating to make you want to leave the forum over one response to you.

How am I uncivil and offensive? Because I pointed out you were wrong? Hey, you were the one who insinuated that I must not have done right by my education because I didn't know how SS was funded, which was, a little offensive yourself.

Will Brown wrote: I'm surprised that a high school graduate would think the income tax funds SS.

But I guess if you can't take someone pointing out you are wrong, leave the thread then, but don't name call. That's just uncivil and offensive.

And this is merely the website promoting itself. This is not academic research. Do you have an economic study suggesting this? Access to a journal article where an economist claims this? Heck, I'll even take a mathematician somewhat sure he has a formula that supports your claims at this point.

You are not moving *too* fast for me, but rather, you don't seem to but up to date with the current discussion among economists about SS reform.

LOL

http://books.google.com/books/about/Sal ... izAAAAIAAJ

it should be very easy for you to refute the data that FairTax.org presented...



http://pafairtax.org/resrcs/govt.pdf

1 John F. Due and John L. Mikesell, Sales Taxation, State and Local Structure and Administration, 2nd
Edition, The Urban Institute, 1994.
2 Herman C. McCloud, Sales Tax and Use Tax: Historical Developments and Differing Features,
Duquesene Law Review, Volume 22, Summer 1984, Number 4.

13 John F. Due and John L. Mikesell, Sales Taxation, State and Local Structure and Administration, 2nd
Edition, The Urban Institute, 1994.
14 SAFCT: State Administered Federal Consumption Tax: The Case For State Administration Of A
Federal Tax, Ernest J. Dronenburg, Jr., New York University Annual State and Local Taxation Conference,
November 30, 1995.
3 John F. Due and John L. Mikesell, Sales Taxation, State and Local Structure and Administration, 2nd
Edition, The Urban Institute, 1994.

I think my post from last night got eaten by the Internet aether.



Art Laffer's flat tax proposal starts at about 2:15.

Art Laffer's predictions are generally wrong.
the Laffer Curve was proven wrong,
in some venues he has even gone on the record to say it doesn't work.

Reagan's statistics about welfare are generally wrong, because he invested a great deal of time studying books with wrong or misinformation.

welfare statistics between when he ran for office and during the great depression are undoubtably inaccurate. it largely depends on what programs are included under the umbrella term "Welfare". eventually during the Depression, nearly every unemployed and underemployed family benefitted from some New Deal program. So the Number of people on welfare then would essentially equal the number of unemployed people.

I'm not sure what the folks employed to build Hoover Dam would count as. is it welfare? of course, Public Spending skyrocketed in the buildup for world war II. millions of americans were put to work building disposable goods. planes, tanks, uniforms, guns, radios, ships, jeeps, rolling stock...and everything else. in economic terms, this was merely a ratcheting up of the New Deal.

when the war was over, there was a "housing shortage" marketed. there was no housing shortage. there was just the realization that we could finance a lot of housing construction. and...heh...it was "good for the economy". many people got rich! because of New Deal actualization! it was what is known as "Stimulus".

as suburbia grew, economic refugees from southern states arrived north and west. there was less to be assimilated into, culturally and economically, and more to be corrupted by. and here we are.

the folks who complain about "socialism" or "taxes" and "gubbament" are generally the ones who have benefited the most from New Deal paradigms.

If the Laffer Curve is wrong, how can this be possible...

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

This is from the 2008 Democratic debates.

Thought I'd give a little more about the Laffer Curve.

Romer says big tax cuts right now.