Quote:
Originally Posted by craigepo
IMHO, the problem inherent with the Laffer curve is that it presumes that we wish to maximize tax revenue. Why the hell would we want to do that? I am very underwhelmed with D.C.'s history thus far of spending tax money. I see no reason to take more money out of the people's wallets to send to DC for them to waste on their pet projects.
That said, I do understand the idea behind the Laffer curve, and the conservative idea that we will increase our tax revenue by decreasing tax rates---I agree with the principle. However, we have a lot of people who are so low on the tax rate scale that they don't "have any skin in the game", which I believe is a problem(disclosure---I think that you should also have some skin in the game to get to vote, but I will save that rant for a different thread).
|
The Laffer curve illustrates only one dimension in a multi-dimensional tax rate vs. tax revenue world. Even if you limit yourself to this one dimension, suggesting that it presumes the desire to maximize revenue is still limited. I would suggest that it shows you how to raise
enough revenue. Enough revenue is determined by political means.
Having
skin in the game is a brilliant insight and is precisely what is wrong with continually removing people from the tax rolls. Both parties do it. It makes for great vote getting and for poor citizenship. Of course, in days gone by, one had to have "skin in the game," in order to vote by owning land. That idea, good or bad as you see it, is long past.