• Corn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    4 months ago

    Nobody ever looked at the laffer curve and went “huh, so we cut taxes for the rich, and tax revenue went down, that means we should raise taxes for the rich.”

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s been a long time since my college econ classes, but I remember the flaw with Laffer’s curve wasn’t so much that it exists as it was his assumption that we’re on the right side of the curve instead of the left.

      As far as I can remember, even if Laffer was correct about his theory (and that’s a hell of an if) no one has been able to demonstrably prove the point where cutting taxes increases federal revenue. It’s pretty obvious at this point the whole theory is just a post hoc rationale for cutting taxes.

      • Corn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        But the laffer curve indicates that if we cut taxes a little and that lowers revenue, cutting them even more would be much worse??

          • Corn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yes, that was my point, that if they actually believed in that model, they would support raising taxes because every time we cut taxes, revenue decreases.