gridlore: Doug looking off camera with a grin (Default)
Douglas Berry ([personal profile] gridlore) wrote2011-07-26 12:15 pm
Entry tags:

My tweets

There it is -

[identity profile] baron-waste.livejournal.com 2011-08-17 01:02 pm (UTC)(link)

I knew I had this somewhere back in there…


http://baron-waste.livejournal.com/1442947.html

But is there a point where they stop producing wealth or leave altogether?

"The rich have always cried wolf like that," Hill says.

But the wolf is here. Maryland created a special tax on rich people that was supposed to bring in $106 million. Instead, the state lost $257 million.

Former Gov. Robert Ehrlich, who is running again for his old job, says: “It reminds me of Charlie Brown. Charlie Brown was always surprised when Lucy pulled the football away. And they're always surprised in Washington and state capitals when the dollars never come in.”

… Art Laffer, the economist who has a curve illustrating this point named after him, isn't surprised.

"It's just economics," he says…

We can see it in the statistics. In 1960, federal revenues were 18.6 percent of total output. Over the next 50 years, that percentage has rarely exceeded 20 percent or fallen below 17 percent. As Laffer says, people adjust their activities to the tax burden…

Water under the bridge (where's my first comment?) but you're not the only one who thinks that increasing the tax burden on the economy will somehow increase the health of the nation. Was a time, paid experts thought that if folks didn't have enough money, why, just print more! You've seen the pictures of wheelbarrows of cash buying a loaf of bread: This was a bad idea. So is jacking up taxes yet higher.

Diminishing returns, what I mean to say.