Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Any evidence taxes stifle development
Me | 11/25/09 | Me

Posted on 11/25/2009 5:28:41 AM PST by The Louiswu

"Does anybody have any evidence (concrete example from a period of our history) that taxes stifle development? Just one??"

Saw this question posted on FB and was curious if there are concrete examples of taxes hurting development.

If there are I am sure someone on FR can help.
Thanks


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; History
KEYWORDS: development; government; taxes

1 posted on 11/25/2009 5:28:41 AM PST by The Louiswu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Rush moved out’a NYC.


2 posted on 11/25/2009 5:31:58 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Smoot Hawley for starters.
3 posted on 11/25/2009 5:32:03 AM PST by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

For these kind of socialist versus free market ecomomic studies, go to Cato or the Heritage Foundation.


4 posted on 11/25/2009 5:32:06 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Depending on what you mean by “development”, I’d kick it right back....”Provide evidence that taxes encourage development”.

The bottom line is that taxes are a transfer of capital from the productive part of the economy (individuals/business) to the unproductive (government).


5 posted on 11/25/2009 5:33:43 AM PST by IDRATHERNOT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Why are jobs moving from the US overseas. Because our corporate tax structure says they should. Once again government is the problem not the solution.


6 posted on 11/25/2009 5:34:25 AM PST by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Taxing cigarettes at confiscatory rates has been a huge cog in the decline of smoking in this country (whether that is good or bad is irrelevant to this discussion at this point). Those industries have had to diversify into everything from mincemeat to mayonnaise, while selling lotsa smokes in China.

Rule of thumb (two sided coin): IF YOU WANT MORE OF SOMETHING, SUBSIDIZE IT; IF YOU WANT LESS OF SOMETHING, TAX IT.


7 posted on 11/25/2009 5:37:55 AM PST by Migraine (Diversity is great... ...until it happens to YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Ask yourself this question--if taxes increase, are you more productive to overcome the loss of YOUR income, or are you more likely to find ways of government supplementing that loss. In the long run, taxes, while necessary to a certain point, then become counter-productive in so far as people become LESS productive and those with the highest burdens seek shelters for their income instead of spending it.

For a specific example, look at the economic downturn towards the end of the Great Depression in 1937-38. That economic downturn occured just as many of the New Deal programs such as SSI, etc., and the taxes associated with them went into effect.
8 posted on 11/25/2009 5:39:11 AM PST by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Michigan.


9 posted on 11/25/2009 5:41:34 AM PST by cripplecreek (Seniors, the new shovel ready project under socialized medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Here's a book recommendation....

The End of Prosperity: How Higher Taxes Will Doom the Economy--If We Let It Happen (Paperback), by Arthur B. Laffer, Stephen Moore, and Peter Tanous.

Chock full of facts, figures, charts, and footnotes. And very readable.

Every taxpayer ought to read this book.

10 posted on 11/25/2009 5:41:37 AM PST by mewzilla (Voter fraud is treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Use the great ‘luxury’ tax on boats from the 1990s as an example. They finally eliminated the tax on the rich to help the middle class. Bump, set, spike, game, set match.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/01/03/opinion/l-boat-luxury-tax-drives-an-industry-aground-926091.html

They also might want to think about what JFK had to say on the subject:

But this is so insane it is unmanageable to discuss it with morons. The question is a bit like asking “do you have an actual example of gravity pulling objects toward each other? Just one.” Yes it really is that stupid.


11 posted on 11/25/2009 5:42:24 AM PST by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Simple Mathematics?


12 posted on 11/25/2009 5:42:30 AM PST by An.American.Expatriate (Here's my strategy on the War against Terrorism: We win, they lose. - with apologies to R.R.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Read Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell. He covers this topic extremely well.


13 posted on 11/25/2009 5:50:50 AM PST by randita (Chains you can bereave in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wita

The best and purest “example” of pro-growth tax-RATE reductions can be seen in the “Steiger Amendment” that actually got passed in the latter years of the Carter Administration. Bill Steiger was one of the great proponents of supply-side economics before Reagan came along and took up the cause. From a blog on the Steiger Amendment:

“Steiger’s belief that Republicans had a special obligation to ordinary Americans was the basis for the Congressional tax revolt he led against President Jimmy Carter. By the late ‘70s, the prosperity of the broad middle class was eroded by inflation, unemployment, rising Social Security payroll taxes and property taxes, tax bracket creep, and a stagnant stock market. Democratic tax relief programs had tended to benefit the very poor or special groups (such as the elderly), while only the rich could take advantage of tax loopholes. The Steiger Amendment of 1978 proposed to cut the capital gains tax in half, thereby encouraging widespread stock ownership, unfreezing capital for investment, and facilitating the growth of new companies and the jobs they would produce. (Steiger had been shocked when one California entrepreneur testified that he could find venture capital only in Japan.) Tax reform was an idea that appealed to millions of Americans who sensed that something was amiss with the nation’s economic and tax policies. Somewhat to Steiger’s surprise, he managed to gain enough Democratic support for his proposal that Carter was forced to sign off on a reduction of the capital gains tax rate from 49 to 28 percent.

The passage of the Steiger Amendment, according to former Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley, marked the moment when “a decade of envy came to its close, and the search for a growth formula started in earnest.” Supply-side economists credited the amendment with launching a venture capital boom that launched companies like Apple, Sun Microsystems, and FedEx. Steiger died before he could see his bill enacted and its results come to fruition. His last writings and interviews suggested that he would have attempted to account for how much of the increase in business startups could be attributed to the tax cut and how much to other factors, and would have tried to ensure that as much of the benefits as possible accrued to the middle class, particularly to minority-owned businesses.”

It took a few years for this to kick in and working in combination with Reagan’s tax cuts, we finally exited the malaise of the Carter years (August 1982 was the big turning point): the stock market took off; the economy took off; investment took off; 18 million jobs would be created in the 1980’s (around 25 million when you include the 1990’s which benefited from all of this growth and investment). It was the greatest period of economic growth since the 1920s... In large measure because of tax-RATE cuts.

And, incidentally, the CUT in the capital gains rate caused a huge increase in capital gains tax REVENUES to the government in the 1980s and when Clinton did it (pressed by the GOP congress) in the late 1990s. When you hear Clintonoids talk about how Clinton balanced the budget, be sure to remind them that it was capital gains tax revenues spurred by those RATE CUTS, that provided the most juice to closing the deficit at the end of the 1990s.


14 posted on 11/25/2009 5:54:13 AM PST by ReleaseTheHounds ("The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Incentive


15 posted on 11/25/2009 5:56:14 AM PST by caver (Obama's first goals: allow more killing of innocents and allow the killers of innocents to go free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
A personal example: I own a small manufacturing business. As with all business, the cost of employing workers is the highest single category of my "cost of doing business." Taxes are a big component of the payroll costs. When the state or federal government raise taxes, that adds to my "cost of doing business" and my choices are to raise prices, reduce costs elsewhere, or lay off workers.

Since most businesses (mine included) operate on very low margins and in highly competitive industries, there is very little opportunity to raise prices, or to cut costs other than payroll costs. When taxes are raised, therefore, I end up laying off workers or not hiring the new employees I had hoped to hire. Lowering taxes reduces the cost of doing business and encourages business expansion. Raising taxes increases the cost of doing business and discourages business expansion.

By the way, businesses do not pay taxes; we collect taxes for the government and pass the increased cost on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. When that is no longer possible, business stops altogether.
16 posted on 11/25/2009 6:06:34 AM PST by mcswan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

simple, luxury tax from the 70’s. Killed boat industry.


17 posted on 11/25/2009 6:14:00 AM PST by MrPiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: randita; The Louiswu

I have to second the Thomas Sowell recommendation. Basic Economics is a great book. Also when the liberals pull out the race card, I get giddy showing them the photo of the author who said all those “mean hateful bigoted things” :-)


18 posted on 11/25/2009 6:29:21 AM PST by IchBinEinBerliner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

See this thread:
BP, ConocoPhillips Reduce 2010 Spending Plans in Alaska

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2392578/posts

BP and ConocoPhillips have reduced their capital spending and developmental budgets for Alaska in 2010 because of higher costs to produce mature fields, disappointing exploratory results and the state’s new tax regime


19 posted on 11/25/2009 6:31:24 AM PST by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
An informative link....

The Laffer Curve: Past, Present, and Future

20 posted on 11/25/2009 6:31:48 AM PST by mewzilla (Voter fraud is treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Many companies receive relief from taxes to develop or build facilities. Here in Reno Cabela’s got tax relief to build their store. They would not have built unless they got the relief.
21 posted on 11/25/2009 6:35:36 AM PST by mad_as_he$$ (Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof. V for victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcswan

Sing it brother, from the rooftops.

I would eliminate business income tax entirely, because businesses do NOT pay it, the consumer does. It is a hidden tax on thconsumer, labeled as a way to ‘tax business’.


22 posted on 11/25/2009 8:11:59 AM PST by RoadGumby (Ask me about Ducky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
Any evidence taxes stifle development

I see many cogent responses to your query. I trust they will aid you but since you could have researched the question as easy as anyone who responded, I want to know why you asked the question.

23 posted on 11/25/2009 9:58:13 AM PST by MosesKnows (Love many, Trust few, and always paddle your own canoe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MosesKnows
"I want to know why you asked the question."

Get used to disappointment, because I'm not going to answer that question. : )
24 posted on 11/25/2009 10:16:47 AM PST by The Louiswu (||||| | | |||||| |||| |||||||||| | | | | ||||||||||||| | |||||||||||||| - really? - no kidding!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu
I'm not going to answer that question

You just did.

25 posted on 11/25/2009 1:03:37 PM PST by MosesKnows (Love many, Trust few, and always paddle your own canoe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

NY used to take a big chunk of my income.
I left, in part due to taxes.
Now NY gets none of my income.
So much for “development” via high taxes.


26 posted on 11/25/2009 1:10:32 PM PST by ctdonath2 (Psalm 109)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Louiswu

Whose “development”? State or private?

Seems pretty obvious that taking away half of someone’s income stifles their own development.


27 posted on 11/25/2009 1:12:49 PM PST by ctdonath2 (Psalm 109)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson