Supply-side Religion

Fun with supply and demand.
User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2619
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Supply-side Religion

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:42 am

I'm no economist, but this argument looks (to my untrained eye) very strong. (I missed it when it was first posted a couple of months ago.)

https://verdict.justia.com/2017/04/12/c ... de-miracle
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10689
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:49 am

Yeah.... its a pisser how the general public buys into this OBVIOUS crap.

Like so many things: the efficiency/benefits of a tax can be plotted on a chart like an upside down "U". Maximum benefit is the very top range. Tax too little, or tax too much...and the justification for the tax program is diminished. REDUCING taxes only works if you are too far to the right, aka: paying too much tax.....and it works by other than trickle down effects.

Tides do life all boats. But tax policy is not the tide.

Pretty simple.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2619
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Sun Jun 18, 2017 1:33 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Yeah.... its a pisser how the general public buys into this OBVIOUS crap.

Like so many things: the efficiency/benefits of a tax can be plotted on a chart like an upside down "U". Maximum benefit is the very top range. Tax too little, or tax too much...and the justification for the tax program is diminished. REDUCING taxes only works if you are too far to the right, aka: paying too much tax.....and it works by other than trickle down effects.

Tides do life all boats. But tax policy is not the tide.

Pretty simple.



That's precisely the missing link in the Laffer-curve argument Republicans are so fond of. Why are they so damned SURE we are on the downward-trending side of the maximum? And why is maximum government revenue the summum bonum of public policy in the first place? Is our government a business that has to show a profit? And if it is, when do we citizens get a share of the profit?
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10689
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:18 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote: That's precisely the missing link in the Laffer-curve argument Republicans are so fond of. Why are they so damned SURE we are on the downward-trending side of the maximum? And why is maximum government revenue the summum bonum of public policy in the first place? Is our government a business that has to show a profit? And if it is, when do we citizens get a share of the profit?


Following your queue: Yea Verily. Too much of "Republican Thinking" follows a business, for profit, rapacious, screw the poor, mindset. Sometimes subconsciously as this instance might reflex. What tax policy should reflect is really very simple: what do we need to do, and how are we going to pay for it?

THEN....the benefit of History is: we can look at schemes in other countries or our own and determine what works and what doesn't. If 50 years ago corporations were paying twice the tax they are today....there may be no good reason to cutting their taxes again? And so on.

Many imponderables are quite clear with a little History.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jun 18, 2017 7:25 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:I'm no economist, but this argument looks (to my untrained eye) very strong.
I agree, and thank you for posting it; it was an excellent read!

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Tides do life all boats.
True, but not helpful to those who can't afford boats. :wgrin:

Upton_O_Goode wrote:Is our government a business that has to show a profit?
This is what many people fail to understand: Government isn't business. Neither is a country's economy.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:What tax policy should reflect is really very simple: what do we need to do, and how are we going to pay for it?

THEN....the benefit of History is: we can look at schemes in other countries or our own and determine what works and what doesn't. If 50 years ago corporations were paying twice the tax they are today....there may be no good reason to cutting their taxes again? And so on.

Many imponderables are quite clear with a little History.
Logical, and I agree. It's unfortunate that the American viewpoint is that, if some other country is doing it, it must be wrong. Especially if we didn't think of it first. *smh* The Republican viewpoint is even more self-centered. After all, it was their Heritage Foundation that invented the health insurance mandate, and Romney who put it into practice in Massachusetts. But once Obama did it, they hated it.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Sun Jun 18, 2017 9:42 pm

The Laffer curve is pure fiction since taxes and economic growth depend on so much more than just one another: the theory is missing most relevant parameters.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26613
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:13 am

ElectricMonk wrote:The Laffer curve is pure fiction since taxes and economic growth depend on so much more than just one another: the theory is missing most relevant parameters.

I disagree that Laffer curves are pure fiction. However I totally agree with you that there are many variables and thus the most efficient equilibrium for a Laffer Curve in a specific economy is really really hard to predict.

What annoys me is that politicians don't ever refer to economic predictions anymore. The simply say reduce tax and that may be taking us further away from what is already the most efficient equilibrium and thus cause social disharmony. .

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Mon Jun 19, 2017 3:09 am

taxation is a second-order chaotic problem: once people are aware of it, they change their behavior in order to avoid it. Unless you have a single tax on a single kind of income, I can't see how something like the Laffer curve could ever be calculated.
But more importantly: taxes have the function of disincentivizing certain expenditures, such as taxes on alcohol, cigarettes or short-term speculation gains etc..
This doesn't fit with the idea of a Laffer Curve at all .
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26613
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jun 19, 2017 3:41 am

ElectricMonk wrote: This doesn't fit with the idea of a Laffer Curve at all .
I agree. An economic model starts as the most simple model there is. It then goes down hill as you try to add econometric (real world) data into the model. The only way of accurately predicting an economy would be to make a model so complex that Arrow's Impossibility theorem would destroy the ability to make sensible narrow policy changes. Therefore economists only go so far or work in "bits". :D
laffercurve.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:17 pm

What supply-side economics/tax cuts for the rich is the Trump administration proposing?

I think that Neil Buchanan is attacking a straw man, beating a dead horse.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/artic ... 3760.html#!

If he wants to attack something, why not attack the monstrous military/secret police budget which is alive and well and growing?
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10689
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:25 pm

Tom Palven wrote:What supply-side economics/tax cuts for the rich is the Trump administration proposing?


Currently: TrumpCare. A tax cut for the Rich dressed in drag.

Where ya been?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2619
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:49 pm

Tom Palven wrote:What supply-side economics/tax cuts for the rich is the Trump administration proposing?

I think that Neil Buchanan is attacking a straw man, beating a dead horse.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/artic ... 3760.html#!

If he wants to attack something, why not attack the monstrous military/secret police budget which is alive and well and growing?


I think Democrats and all liberals need to hit hard at the very heart of the Republican idea that private industry will take care of everybody by giving everybody a good job. Private industry sells only to people who already have money. That means (to take an example) that if we simply allowed private companies to plan, get permits, and build highways where they want to, all the poor rural districts would have mud paths strewn with stones, all the poor sections of cities would have a solid line of potholes, and all the business districts and well-heeled suburbs would have smooth paved roads to drive on. And the same goes for education, health care, and everything else that should be a public right.

But hey, as we recently heard, we're doing really well with the Panama Canal. Thank goodness the government wasn't involved in building that.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:27 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote: This doesn't fit with the idea of a Laffer Curve at all .
[color=#000080]I agree.


Laffer himself put the optimum tax rate in the 65% - 70% range for the wealthy.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:43 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote: This doesn't fit with the idea of a Laffer Curve at all .
[color=#000080]I agree.


Laffer himself put the optimum tax rate in the 65% - 70% range for the wealthy.


Income tax? Estate tax? Consumption tax? Liquor? Cigarettes?

trying to optimize a single parameter in a complex multi-dimensional problem is pretty much useless.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:19 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote: This doesn't fit with the idea of a Laffer Curve at all .
[color=#000080]I agree.


Laffer himself put the optimum tax rate in the 65% - 70% range for the wealthy.


Income tax? Estate tax? Consumption tax? Liquor? Cigarettes?

trying to optimize a single parameter in a complex multi-dimensional problem is pretty much useless.


I agree. My point is that the proponents of low taxes conveniently like to reference Laffer while ignoring that the optimums are probably not low.

I also doubt that optimizing tax revenue is a useful goal for a society.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:12 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:I also doubt that optimizing tax revenue is a useful goal for a society.


True.
For the economy it doesn't matter all that much whether people spend the money on taxes or tax attorneys if it makes them feel better. Waste happens in every system, and it's not worth trying to fight it if doing so would cost about as much or more than the damage of the waste itself.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26613
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jun 22, 2017 2:59 am

OlegTheBatty wrote: I agree. My point is that the proponents of low taxes conveniently like to reference Laffer while ignoring that the optimums are probably not low.
Yep.

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2619
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:59 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote: I agree. My point is that the proponents of low taxes conveniently like to reference Laffer while ignoring that the optimums are probably not low.
Yep.


Just wondering: There must be a "Laffer curve" for each individual, i.e., some point at which a given tax rate will produce maximal tax revenue from that person. So, is the standard Laffer curve some kind of average of all these hypothetical individual Laffer curves? Kind of like Quetelet's "homme moyen," who, he thought, was the sociological equivalent of the mechanical center of mass?
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26613
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jun 25, 2017 8:55 am

Upton_O_Goode wrote:Just wondering: There must be a "Laffer curve" for each individual, i.e., some point at which a given tax rate will produce maximal tax revenue from that person. So, is the standard Laffer curve some kind of average of all these hypothetical individual Laffer curves? Kind of like Quetelet's "homme moyen," who, he thought, was the sociological equivalent of the mechanical center of mass?


I would assume that a Laffer curve for households regarding taxation, is the average, simply because a Laffer curve can be incorporated into a normal household demand curve using the same average.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:03 am

Since US mainstream economists claim that the US has a "consumer-driven economy" as opposed to a "supply-side" production-driven economy, here is some good news for them:
https://www.rt.com/business/398954-us-credit-card-debt/
Last edited by Tom Palven on Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:32 am

Tom Palven wrote:Since US mainstream economists claim that the US has a "consumer-driven economy" as opposed to a "supply-side" production-driven economy, here is some great news for them:
https://www.rt.com/business/398954-us-credit-card-debt/


actually, that is great news for many, because it means that interest rates have to stay low, or you will have a wave of private bankruptcies.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:56 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:Since US mainstream economists claim that the US has a "consumer-driven economy" as opposed to a "supply-side" production-driven economy, here is some great news for them:
https://www.rt.com/business/398954-us-credit-card-debt/


actually, that is great news for many, because it means that interest rates have to stay low, or you will have a wave of private bankruptcies.


Why does this mean that interest rates have to stay low?
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:22 pm

Because it makes neither economic nor political sense to let millions of consumers go bankrupt without some way to soften their fall. And Republicans won't do anything of the sort, so it will (once again) be the job of the Dems to prevent an economic collapse.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:46 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Because it makes neither economic nor political sense to let millions of consumers go bankrupt without some way to soften their fall. And Republicans won't do anything of the sort, so it will (once again) be the job of the Dems to prevent an economic collapse.


So, how are the Democrats (once again) going to prevent an economic collapse?
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:50 pm

Tom Palven wrote:So, how are the Democrats (once again) going to prevent an economic collapse?


regulating loan sharking, taxing those with actual money,


I guess your solution is to send everyone to the Poor House?
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:02 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Because it makes neither economic nor political sense to let millions of consumers go bankrupt without some way to soften their fall. And Republicans won't do anything of the sort, so it will (once again) be the job of the Dems to prevent an economic collapse.

Interest rates are not set by the government.

Raising interest rates does make fiscal sense if the revenue generated by the increase is greater than the loss due to the bankruptcies. Be that as it may, credit card interest rates are not dependant on the Fed's prime rate.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:13 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:So, how are the Democrats (once again) going to prevent an economic collapse?


regulating loan sharking, taxing those with actual money,


I guess your solution is to send everyone to the Poor House?


Yes. How very perceptive of you.
Last edited by Tom Palven on Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:15 pm

The Fed, unlike many other central banks, is supposed to guard not only against inflation, but also the labor market.
Massive loss of purchasing power wouldn't be conductive for that.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:25 pm

The Fed doesn't look at it from the perspective of the working grunt. They look at it from the perspective of the banking industry. They will keep the rates low as long as the current liquidity trap persists, because their economic models say that's what to do. It doesn't actually matter if the models work or not.

If the Fed thinks the trap is over, they may well raise the prime rate. However, that doesn't affect credit card rates, as those are determined by market forces, greed, government regulations that set maximums, etc.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:26 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:The Fed, unlike many other central banks, is supposed to guard not only against inflation, but also the labor market.
Massive loss of purchasing power wouldn't be conductive for that.


...and fortunately the Democrats (who control no branches of government) will save us (yet again). Thank you in advance, Democrats.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:42 pm

Tom, how are the GOP tax cuts going to help, exactly?
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:13 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Tom, how are the GOP tax cuts going to help, exactly?


I think that involuntary taxation is theft, a violation of the Golden Rule, however my loathing of Democrat politicians is exceeded only by my loathing of Republican politicians to he extent that I would find it hard to endorse anything they do, and, quite frankly I don't care whether tax cuts would help the US economy. The sooner the US goes virtually bankrupt, the sooner the world will be a better, safer, place. (Technically the US can't go bankrupt because, like Zimbabwe, the government can just keep printing money to pay its debts.)

Like quantitative easing in Zimbabwe:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=zi ... ORM=HDRSC2
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26613
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:55 pm

Tom Palven wrote:I think that involuntary taxation is theft
So when travelling overseas, do you voluntarily donate tax to various foreign governments for the use of their roads, sewerage, water, customs services and so on? If you don't........aren't you a thief?

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4807
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Tom Palven » Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:59 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:I think that involuntary taxation is theft
So when travelling overseas, do you voluntarily donate tax to various foreign governments for the use of their roads, sewerage, water, customs services and so on? If you don't........aren't you a thief?


Yes, I do. I try to buy as much of the beautiful paintings and hand-crafted gifts that I can carry, even in the Basque part of Spain where the tapas and the people are wonderful, but the tolls on the roads every 1,000 meters or so are oppressive.

And as I've probably said before, I loved the Aussies, the Blue Mountains, snorkeling off Cairns, and the sexual relations my second wife and I had with Aussies when we visited there on our honeymoon.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26613
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:59 am

Tom Palven wrote:I think that involuntary taxation is theft
Matthew Ellard wrote: So when travelling overseas, do you voluntarily donate tax to various foreign governments for the use of their roads, sewerage, water, customs services and so on? If you don't........aren't you a thief?
Tom Palven wrote:Yes, I do. I try to buy as much of the beautiful paintings and hand-crafted gifts that I can carry,
I see. You are a capitalist. :D

On a more serious note, I don't think we can eradicate human psychology and therefore I cannot see any political system where taxation is voluntary. Capitalism does work on psychological greed and reducing taxation is essentially the same behaviour in any political system.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3193
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby ElectricMonk » Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:24 am

If you don't want to pay taxes, move to a country that doesn't raise them.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2619
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:10 pm

Tom Palven wrote:
ElectricMonk wrote:Tom, how are the GOP tax cuts going to help, exactly?


I think that involuntary taxation is theft, a violation of the Golden Rule, however my loathing of Democrat politicians is exceeded only by my loathing of Republican politicians to he extent that I would find it hard to endorse anything they do, and, quite frankly I don't care whether tax cuts would help the US economy. The sooner the US goes virtually bankrupt, the sooner the world will be a better, safer, place. (Technically the US can't go bankrupt because, like Zimbabwe, the government can just keep printing money to pay its debts.)

Like quantitative easing in Zimbabwe:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=zi ... ORM=HDRSC2


Well, there's a lot in there that I think is very wrong. Civil government cannot function without coercing some people to keep them in line. I recently read a full-length biography of the Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin. He was, by any standards, a very nice man (and an excellent geologist who gave a tour of lectures in the United States on Russian literature). Yet he believed that if we could just remove all coercion, people would all become brothers and sisters to one another and the world would become a paradise again. He returned to Russia after the Revolution to spend the last few years of his life there. He soon grew very disillusioned with Lenin, but by then it was too late for him to revise his philosophy to any extent. I'll be happy if we can minimize violence in society; I don't expect that responsible public behavior is ever going to become widespread on a voluntary basis. There is simply too much greed, envy, and hatred in society.

As for the US, as an American, I'd be delighted for us to roll back to where we were in the year 1895, say, and concentrate on repairing the damage from the institution of slavery and the dispossession of the aboriginal inhabitants of the land. But, it's not clear that the world would be better off, unless some power to impose order on the international scale could be found to replace us. Under the current administration in Washington, the need is urgent to find a replacement for the US in international affairs. There are many countries that are not at present sullied by the experience of power and influence, but the only ones that look like viable candidates (to me) are those in the EU and the British Commonwealth.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Phoenix76
Poster
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 7:16 am
Custom Title: Phoenix76
Location: Qld, Australia

Re: Supply-side Religion

Postby Phoenix76 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:29 am

The theory later became a cornerstone of President Ronald Reagan’s economic policy, which resulted in one of the biggest tax cuts in history. During his time in office, tax revenues received by the government increased from $517 billion in 1980 to $909 billion in 1988.


https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/laffercurve.asp

Come in late on this discussion,and had to read up on the Laffer Curve. The above quote is interesting though.

Politics in Australia are very different to those of America. Some might say "Thank God". I don't because I don't believe in him. We introduced GST (Goods & Services Tax) to Australia, a supply tax, back on 1 July 2000. We had a lot of opposition, mainly I believe because people didn't understand the concept of it.

Part of the deal was that States were supposed to give up some of their taxes as an offset and they would be compensated by extra funding from the GST. However, States being States, this didn't happen, at least immediately,and in some case, still hasn't happened.

Some complain that GST should be applicable to all supplies, but the Government exempted such things as fresh food, medical, certain government charges, etc. In the food department, processed foods were not exempt.

But I think the failing of this system was that we did not eliminate many other taxes at all. If we good rid of income tax, both personal and company, and set the tax rate at say 20% instead of 10%, then the whole system would have been better accepted. What a great incentive to up production without the burden of increased taxation. Especially tru for personal taxation. Many workers are resistant to doing overtime because they believe they lose too much tax on the extra pay. See they are taxed at their marginal rate of tax for that overtime. Our tax rates are progressive up to a maximum of 45% for personal tax. But of course over the span of a year they would be entitled to tax refunds at the end of the financial year.

Company tax rates are 27.5% for small enterprises, less than $20M turnover, and 30% for the rest.

Now, when we have burgeoning debt problems, no government is prepared to entertain increasing the GST rate. By upping it to 15%, we could wipe out our debt. But then, I'm sure they could find ways to spend even more money that we don't have, and put us right back where we started.

Burt my belief is that Government enterprises should not be run with a view to making profits. They should be responsible for supplying essential services, such as roads, public transport, power and water. These should be supplied at no more than cost, and perhaps even subsidised, such as public transport. But, at least here, the various Governments have lost track of this responsibility and have to sell off essential service supply, and/or make profits on their supply.

I have no confidence in our economy as it stands. We are too reliant on coal and iron ore exports at the moment. And if the Chinese economy falters, or changes direction, we are stuffed. I'm retired, so it won't effect me too much, but I pity my kids trying to make their way in today's world.


Return to “Economics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests