Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Todd ·
Dec 12, 2011 at 1:42pm
Steve, the math is the math. You can’t lower rates and raise revenue, unless you’re getting revenue from someplace else. -President Obama on 60 Minutes
- Comment (24)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
I couldn't make myself watch the interview.
Holy cow. Did he actually say that?
Oct '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
He did say that, and many claim that the theory behind the Laffer curve has been debunked.
Yes, the Laffer curve was abused by Republicans as an excuse to spend way too much, and reasonable people can argue over the shape of the curve, but the basic logic behind the curve is irrefutable.
To say that the Laffer curve has been debunked because of the nation's fiscal situation is like saying that the laws of gravity have been completely discredited because we can observe airplanes flying through the air.
Edited on Dec 12, 2011 at 1:22pmAug '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Well, you know, that Nobel Prize he won wasn't in economics.
Nov '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Why is he considered such a damn genius again?
Aug '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
I have been meaning to do a Laffer curve post for a while now. Obama was asked a Laffer curve question once in the 2008 election when his interviewer pointed out that Obama favored higher capital gains tax rate, even though lower rates meant more revenue. Obama answered that he favored the higher rates because of fairness despite the lower revenues.
Edited on Dec 12, 2011 at 1:53pmOct '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
And don't forget 2009 when they were passing the stimulus. The argument was that we needed economic growth to get tax revenues up (true), and the only way to get economic growth was through government spending, implying that increased spending would increase tax revenue and lower the budget deficit.
Aug '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
The president's statement is accurate if you assume that we're already to the left of the curve's maximum. Overall this is almost certainly correct, though it's entirely possible that we're to the right of the maximum for some specific taxes (eg, overseas corporate income).
Mar '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Lower the rates and get the money from someplace else. Sounds good to me.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Here's a crazy idea - couldn't we reduce the size of Government, then we wouldn't need so much tax revenue?
Aug '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Obama's jaw-dropping statement from a 2008 debate with Hillary Clinton can be seen HERE.
And yes, he says that even though raising taxes would decrease revenue, he would do it for the sake of "fairness." And then he goes off on his usual "evil rich people" commentary.
What's also surprising is how little his rhetoric has changed. This could have been a speech from last week.
Oct '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
That's it. I think the GOP would do a lot better to focus on low tax rates for growth or simplicity rather than revenue maximization, because the Laffer curve probably won't do it.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
I don't know. I'm inclined to give Obama a break on this one. Very few people, including conservatives, understand the Laffer Curve. Sure, if Obama knew it, he wouldn't like it. But, if the average person hasn't been taught it, then it's a strange concept to understand from scratch because it's counterintuitive and, on the surface, illogical. And all but a few universities and colleges (and that high school in Ferris Bueller's Day Off) never mention it in their liberal economic classes because the Curve is a good weapon against class warfare rhetoric.
Sure, most conservatives know the Bush tax cuts increased revenue but I'm not sure how many can point to the Laffer Curve as the reason why. They get that lower taxes generate more economic growth, and thus additional tax revenues, but very few would utter the word "Laffer" in their explanation. I mean, when was the last time you heard a conservative Senator or Congressman talk about the Laffer Curve when it comes to a defense against higher tax rates? I'll admit I don't watch CSPAN but the number of times has to be very, very low.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
As an additional point, Laffer Curve or not, there is no tax rate on anything--income, sales, sin, import, etc.--that will get us out of our current mess. Without spending cuts, no tax rate can make 15 trillion disappear.
Jan '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
It's only crazy if you're running for an election in the USA.
May '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Static scoring vs. dynamic scoring. Taxes, and tax rates, change behavior. Why is this such a difficult concept?
Apr '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
We knew Obama is an economic idiot after the Joe the Plumber encounter, and an arrogant one, to boot.
OIIOHH
Dec '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
Laffer can't ever be completely debunked. The endpoints of the curve are both self-evident and zero. Take the lower end: if the tax rate is zero, government revenue is zero. I don't think that Obama could argue with this. It's the upper end with which the president has problems. If the tax rate is 100%, government revenue is again zero, for several reasons. First, there's no reason to work if no pay is retained. But much more importantly, when the worker starves to death, he can't pay taxes any more. Between those two points there is a region where revenue is not zero. There's no obvious reason that region should have more than one maximum, or that the function is non-continuous.
Dec '11
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
He managed to usurp taxpayer dollars to fund tuition for the Punahou School, Columbia, Harvard.
Jun '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
A Perfect explanation. Excellent.
Jun '10
Re: Obama Redraws the Laffer Curve
The problem Obama has is that he wouldn't dare admit that he knows what a Laffer Curve is our how it is explained. Politically, he simply can't go down that road. It would doom the Dems. Marxists hate this stuff because it explains economics (and the attendant aspect of human nature) in opposition to their own theories.