Historically, higher periods of economic growth have been during periods of higher marginal income tax rates.
The analysts cherry picked the start date as post-WWII so that the only un-destroyed country on the planet (U.S.) showed great growth under high rates.
Pluswhich, if higher marginal tax rates CAUSED higher periods of economic growth, then a 99% tax would maximize economic growth, wouldn’t it?
Further, has the Laffer Curve been disproved?
Additionally, “Hauser’s Law,” postulates that US federal revenues, as a percentage of GDP, have remained stable at approximately 19.5% over the period 1950 to 2007 despite changes in marginal tax rates over the same period. Doesn’t that show that changes marginal rates are merely avoided by citizens by changing their economic behavior and presentation of taxable income to the Feds?
Do you believe the CBO is an unbiased source for Tax Policy advice? Or, mightn’t they be biased towards the source of their paychecks?
One can go on all day.
Ah yes, the old cause/effect dissonance. Good to see you’re still trying.