Started By
Message
locked post

The Laffer Curve turns 40: the legacy of a controversial idea

Posted on 12/28/14 at 9:13 am
Posted by SuperSaint
Sorting Out OT BS Since '2007'
Member since Sep 2007
140462 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 9:13 am
Wash"Com"Post




quote:

It was 40 years ago this month that two of President Gerald Ford’s top White House advisers, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, gathered for a steak dinner at the Two Continents restaurant in Washington with Wall Street Journal editorial writer Jude Wanniski and Arthur Laffer, former chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget. The United States was in the grip of a gut-wrenching recession, and Laffer lectured to his dinner companions that the federal government’s 70 percent marginal tax rates were an economic toll booth slowing growth to a crawl.

To punctuate his point, he grabbed a pen and a cloth cocktail napkin and drew a chart showing that when tax rates get too high, they penalize work and investment and can actually lead to revenue losses for the government. Four years later, that napkin became immortalized as “the Laffer Curve” in an article Wanniski wrote for the Public Interest magazine. (Wanniski would later grouse only half-jokingly that he should have called it the Wanniski Curve.)

This was the first real post-World War II intellectual challenge to the reigning orthodoxy of Keynesian economics, which preached that when the economy is growing too slowly, the government should stimulate demand for products with surges in spending. The Laffer model countered that the primary problem is rarely demand — after all, poor nations have plenty of demand — but rather the impediments, in the form of heavy taxes and regulatory burdens, to producing goods and services.

In the four decades since, the Laffer Curve and its supply-side message have taken something of a beating. They’ve been ridiculed as “trickle down” and “voodoo economics” (a phrase coined in 1980 by George H.W. Bush), and disparaged in mainstream economics texts as theories of “charlatans and cranks.” Last year, even Pope Francis criticized supply-side theories, writing that they have “never been confirmed by the facts” and rely on “a crude and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.” And this year, French economist Thomas Piketty penned a best-selling back-to-the-future book arguing for a return to the good old days of 70 percent tax rates on the rich.

Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98436 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 9:23 am to
It has proved correct countless times.
Posted by CollegeFBRules
Member since Oct 2008
24236 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 9:24 am to
If it were wrong, why don't democrats jump the tax rate to 80%?
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98436 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 9:28 am to
Considering that almost half don't pay income taxes, don't think it can't happen.

Dumbest thing the GOP ever did was removing people from the tax rolls. It's a great talking point, but if they don't have "skin in the game," they won't give a good shite about what tax rates are.
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
67626 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 9:33 am to
I think he was wrong about 100% tax rate always = to 0% collections.

If the state is willing to kill people and take their stuff, you can still achieve collections at 100%, but you can do it only 1 time.
This post was edited on 12/28/14 at 10:58 am
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:28 am to
quote:

This was the first real post-World War II intellectual challenge to the reigning orthodoxy of Keynesian economics, 
Wait, what? The Laffer curve is a fundamentally Keynesian concept; Laffer himself said as much. You're still seeking to stimulate the economy by running a deficit and then growing your way out of it, it's just a more con-friendly way of creating it.
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
162190 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:30 am to
quote:

turns 40: the legacy of a controversial ideaIt has proved correct countless times.

And incorrect an equal amount of times
Posted by Rawdawgs
Member since Dec 2007
910 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:54 am to
quote:

Dumbest thing the GOP ever did was removing people from the tax rolls. It's a great talking point, but if they don't have "skin in the game," they won't give a good shite about what tax rates are.


Exactly
Posted by lsu480
Downtown Scottsdale
Member since Oct 2007
92876 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:57 am to
Can we do the Bell Curve next?
Posted by theenemy
Member since Oct 2006
13078 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:37 am to
quote:

I think he was wrong about 100% tax rate always = to 0% collections.


No.

If you tax at 100% there is no incentive to work anymore so production stops therefore collections fall to 0%.

Think about it....

If the gov't told you today that starting Jan 1 they would begin taxing at a 100% rate....would you still go to work and work for free?
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
67626 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:42 am to
read my entire post
Posted by Bestbank Tiger
Premium Member
Member since Jan 2005
70823 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:43 am to
quote:


If the gov't told you today that starting Jan 1 they would begin taxing at a 100% rate....would you still go to work and work for free?


Exactly.

The Laffer Curve hasn't been disproven. We just don't know where the inflection point is, and one reason is that the tax code has tens of thousands of pages of loopholes and dodges.
Posted by theenemy
Member since Oct 2006
13078 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 12:06 pm to
quote:

If the state is willing to kill people and take their stuff, you can still achieve collections at 100%, but you can do it only 1 time.


Once the gov't kills everyone and seizes 100% of their property then what is the collection rate for the future.....0%
This post was edited on 12/28/14 at 12:07 pm
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
67626 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 12:09 pm to
quote:

Once the gov't kills everyone and seizes 100% of their property then what is the collection rate for the future.....0%




yes, I agree

That's why I said you can only do it one time (every couple of generations or so)
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112393 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 1:01 pm to
quote:

The Laffer curve is a fundamentally Keynesian concept; Laffer himself said as much. You're still seeking to stimulate the economy by running a deficit and then growing your way out of it, it's just a more con-friendly way of creating it.


No. Keynes stimulates the economy through increased govt intervention. Laffer stimulates the economy through less govt intervention (lower taxes). The current growth we're seeing from gas price drops is a good example of Laffer's ideas. The govt did not mandate lower gas prices.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57077 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:10 pm to
quote:

Dumbest thing the GOP ever did was removing people from the tax rolls.
This! GWB did the most damage here. Those evil "Bush tax cuts for the rich" took millions of middle class voters off the tax rolls.
Posted by I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
27843 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:24 pm to
Laffer is right and always has been.

There is a mindset among Reagan critics that his tax cuts added to the deficit. That is simply not true. Reagan's tax cuts increased revenues by billions.

Coolidge and Kennedy cuts did the same thing.

LINK

Reagan simply did not have a Congress to work with to stop spending.

The worst thing that happened domestically in the last half of the twentieth century was failing to pass a balanced budget amendment. Even Jerry Brown ran against Carter in the democratic primaries calling for it's passage. At one point early in the Reagan years it looked as if there would be enough states call for the amendment that it would pass. Thomas Tip O'Neil, democrat hero, opposed it.

We would have a much smaller government today had the amendment passed.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112393 posts
Posted on 12/28/14 at 3:35 pm to
BTW, Laffer is 74 and still writing. He's in good health.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 12/29/14 at 10:59 am to


The controversy isn't over whether the Laffer curve exists. The controversy is over where the peak is and to which side of it we are on. All the OP has done is redefine the argument so he can win it.
Posted by GoCrazyAuburn
Member since Feb 2010
34858 posts
Posted on 12/29/14 at 11:02 am to


first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram