Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
I believe this is referred to as denial!


Do not know what your source is but it sounds a lot like wishful thinking to protect the real perp.


Simple statements with no support. A logical look at this should suffice. If people have more of the money they worked for then they can choose what to do with that money; save it, spend it, invest it. In each case this money creates work for someone, that work generates income that income is taxed. since there is an increase in income then the revenues to the Government increase.
The greatest cause for Government income problems is the fact that there is no restraint on the Government checkbook. Would you not love the ability to increase you credit line if you were getting close to that limit? Even under the current conditions, when any sane person would realize that income is down and the need to cut spending the Government is doing just the opposite! Where does the Government get its money? Especially when they have "promised" to see that there is not one dime in tax increase for people earning under a certain amount. What is a fee on a business other than a tax? When taxes are increased on a business who pays that tax?
You are in denial.

You claim there is no evidence for my claim that tax cuts don't pay for themselves, yet ever since the Reagan Administration the national deficit has grown at a faster rate than the GDP.

This obviously fails. At the logical extreme if taxes are 0% then no amount of additional work will generate additional income. With taxes being cut from 70% to 30% on the top bracket the amount of taxable income generating activity would need to increase by 233%, which historically has not been the case. You talk of everything in terms of general principles with no sound numbers to evaluate them. Decreasing taxes will increase productivity in many situations. The question becomes does the productivity increase result in enough additional tax revenue to make up for the tax decrease. You have attempted to completely ignore the downside of increasing taxes, while glorifying the upside. You avoid any attempt to use numbers because the numbers we have disprove your argument.

It's very nice to believe tax decreases are good for the government, after all who doesn't want to pay less taxes, but the evidence shows they are not.

Furthermore, it's easy to say the problem is government spending, yet somehow in 30 years no one has managed to slash the programs causing the problem. Note that not a single person voted against Medicare which is a bad offender in terms of spending. Maybe its because government programs actually correspond to things we value as a society and should be paid for?