Can anyone explain this graph? Beenthere?

[canndo]

Tax cuts are not the solution, they never have been.

 

[NoDrama]

So if A then B correct? According to your premise (The reason why you posted this graph in the first place)all we need to do is tax everyone 100% and we will have economic growth like never before.

Tell me canndo, what is the EXACT percentage of taxes that will encourage wild uninhibited economic growth?? Don't hold back, tell us EXACTLY what the number is please.

 

[canndo]

So if A then B correct? According to your premise (The reason why you posted this graph in the first place)all we need to do is tax everyone 100% and we will have economic growth like never before.

Tell me canndo, what is the EXACT percentage of taxes that will encourage wild uninhibited economic growth?? Don't hold back, tell us EXACTLY what the number is please.

And by those who claim lower taxes on the "job creators", a 0 percent tax would create infinite numbers of jobs.

I can't give you that exact figure. I can say that the tax rate of 90 percent on the rich seems to have done quite well for us all.


I am certain that there could be constructed a sort of laffer curve for income tax related to job creation (rather than revenue)

 

[NoDrama]

And by those who claim lower taxes on the "job creators", a 0 percent tax would create infinite numbers of jobs.

I can't give you that exact figure. I can say that the tax rate of 90 percent on the rich seems to have done quite well for us all.


I am certain that there could be constructed a sort of laffer curve for income tax related to job creation (rather than revenue)

You know what good the Laffer curve does? NONE it is NEVER used to figure out the correct amount of tax! you know why? Cuz it is not possible to tell where you currently are on the curve. The Laffer curve is not a formula for anything, it is nothing more than a explanation of policy effects. You cannot use the Laffer curve in any way!

The Fed has more to do with economic growth than anything government can do with tax rates.

Your very own curve shows that a couple years after Clinton tax increases happened we suffered the worst negative change in GDP on the whole friggin' chart. What would this say to someone who understands Finance? That tax rates don't count for much when it comes to GDP growth, mostly growth comes from demand that is met by production. We have reduced our production by nearly 50% since 1980. I would say GDP growth has more to do with NAFTA and the European Union than tax rates. You ship your production off to another country and eventually that will hurt you.

 

[canndo]

You know what good the Laffer curve does? NONE it is NEVER used to figure out the correct amount of tax! you know why? Cuz it is not possible to tell where you currently are on the curve. The Laffer curve is not a formula for anything, it is nothing more than a explanation of policy effects. You cannot use the Laffer curve in any way!

The Fed has more to do with economic growth than anything government can do with tax rates.

Your very own curve shows that a couple years after Clinton tax increases happened we suffered the worst negative change in GDP on the whole friggin' chart. What would this say to someone who understands Finance? That tax rates don't count for much when it comes to GDP growth, mostly growth comes from demand that is met by production. We have reduced our production by nearly 50% since 1980. I would say GDP growth has more to do with NAFTA and the European Union than tax rates. You ship your production off to another country and eventually that will hurt you.

I am aware of the reality of the laffer curve and that it is meant to show the function of tax rates over revenue (or is it the other way around)

I do not know enough about how the Fed works to discuss this with you.

I see the downward slope that does not correlate with any tax changes. What I don't see is an upward slope after tax reductions.

 

[medicineman]

It's really strange how the bush tax cuts on the "JOB CREATORS" sic, did not create any jobs, in fact it lost 7 million plus??? go figure, more right wing doubletalk.

 

[beenthere]

View attachment 2339637

Tax cuts are not the solution, they never have been.

Your graph is skewed my friend and history is a testament to that fact.
It shows economic growth during the Clinton era, are you aware Clinton cut taxes on businesses and investments?

 

[UncleBuck]

even romney has admitted trickle down does not trickle down, because if it worked like that, the 47% would be cuckoo for cocoa puffs about tax breaks for the rich.

 

[NoDrama]

even romney has admitted trickle down does not trickle down, because if it worked like that, the 47% would be cuckoo for cocoa puffs about tax breaks for the rich.

Why would they want that? Its class warfare out there bucky, people like you are so envious of people with a lot more than you and you want government to give you a slice of it. We can't have tax cuts on the rich because you can't cut taxes on the poor below nothing, in fact the EIC was developed to GIVE people a transfer payment from the rich to the poor, but it doesn't really work that way. Instead they just borrow the money (Deficit spend) and the poor pay for it all anyway because they can't afford to invest much because they have to eat and have a place to hang their hat all the while the more we borrow the more they print and the more inflation there is.

 

[UncleBuck]

Its class warfare out there bucky, people like you are so envious of people with a lot more than you and you want government to give you a slice of it.

i had no idea about this desire of mine.

all this time i thought i was happy living my low responsibility lifestyle. darn.

well, thanks for clearing up my own wants for me. it gets pesky having to always define my own and shit.

 

[beenthere]

Your graph is skewed my friend and history is a testament to that fact.
It shows economic growth during the Clinton era, are you aware Clinton cut taxes on businesses and investments?

Now, would you like to explain your own graph canndo?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Why would they want that? Its class warfare out there bucky, people like you are so envious of people with a lot more than you and you want government to give you a slice of it. We can't have tax cuts on the rich because you can't cut taxes on the poor below nothing, in fact the EIC was developed to GIVE people a transfer payment from the rich to the poor, but it doesn't really work that way. Instead they just borrow the money (Deficit spend) and the poor pay for it all anyway because they can't afford to invest much because they have to eat and have a place to hang their hat all the while the more we borrow the more they print and the more inflation there is.

You're full of shit, dude. Londonfog said the EIC was done out of kindness, so if you get one, "you're fucking welcome!"

 

[ink the world]

The EIC was brought about by Reagan to assist the WORKING poor, help compensate from the below living wages they are paid.

These peope are not bums, they are the WORKING POOR. The bullshit trickle down path weve followed has created more and more of them.

 

[deprave]

View attachment 2339637

Tax cuts are not the solution, they never have been.

show me on the graph where the bad man touched you?

How does the mafia stealing from people help anyone other than the mafia?

 

[canndo]

Now, would you like to explain your own graph canndo?

I figured it was pretty self evident - which is why I try to use graphs as much as possible. The graph shows that cutting taxes does not spur economic growth.

 

[beenthere]

I figured it was pretty self evident - which is why I try to use graphs as much as possible. The graph shows that cutting taxes does not spur economic growth.

What's the matter, can't refute the fact Bill Clinton CUT taxes on businesses and investments, you know, for those wealthy investors! LOL

Kind of stuck your foot in your mouth with your own graph, didn't ya! LMAO

 

[canndo]

What's the matter, can't refute the fact Bill Clinton CUT taxes on businesses and investments, you know, for those wealthy investors! LOL

Kind of stuck your foot in your mouth with your own graph, didn't ya! LMAO

Nope - at every junction of tax cuts the line goes..... down, not up.

 

[canndo]

Beenthere? Clinton's tax cut was signed in 1997. Note that it corresponds directly to the steep downward slope of the graph. Further proof that tax cuts don't rev up the economy.