Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

HARVARD study shows tax CUTS more effective reducing deficits


westvirginia
 Share

Recommended Posts

Corporations always pass up projects where spending money would create extra wealth so they can keep the cash and kill seniors and children.

 

 

I don;t think these are mutually exclusive. Perhaps they could spend the money on projects that both created wealth and killed seniors and children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For the record I will note that OLS growth regression models are subject to problems such as endogeneity. The use of more sophisticated techniques (such as Dynamic Panel Analysis) will often wipe out the statistical significance of coefficients from OLS models.

 

Does this have anything to do with the study I read that said raising revenue by ending tax cuts that were supposed to be temporary to pay past due bills,during historically low tax rates and historically high spending, is a pretty effective tool in reducing deficits?

Edited by bushwacked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With your infinite wisdom please tell us why corporations would CHOOSE to horde cash.

 

Mind if I answer, at least with why I would hold on to cash in their situation.

 

 

They simply do not see any current opportunities that present enough potential return for the risk they would take to put the money into play. They believe better opportunities will come up in the future. In wiegie terms, the opportunity cost of putting that cash into play and locking it up is too great compared to potential future opportunities.

 

A simple exampleusing a situation we face as individuals - say you have $10K in a savings account making 0.35%. You can either lock it up in a long term CD (say 5 years) paying 2.1% (for simplicity, let's assume breaking the CD early is not allowed or the penalty is forfeiture of all interest paid), or, if you believe that in the future, rates will rise to a point where it is more profitable over that same time horizon to hold the money in cash and put it into a 4-year CD one year later at say 6%, it is better to sit on the cash until that better opportunity comes about. Of course, there is a risk that our prediction of what will be available does not come to fruition, so we include that level of confidence in our calculations and go with what is most likely to be the most profitable course of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick question. If cutting taxes really was the way to go, then why on earth did this economic recession/ increased debt levels ever happen? Bush reduced taxes to one of the lowest rates ever, and Obama cut taxes in the stimulus as well.

 

Shouldnt everything be booming with all these tax cuts according to your logic?

 

Wow, very scientific analysis....Impressive... Typical ideological speak. In the face of reason, statistics, and scientific study, the other sides response is: NO, NOOO, NONONONONON, NO NO NO NO no no NO NO nnnnnnOOOOO, NNNNOOOOO , N -O. NO

 

EVEN OBAMA, do you hear me EVEN OBAMA agrees lower taxes increase tax revenues AND increases JOBS. The reason OBAMA (admittedly so!) wants to raise taxes is b/c it is more fair! Social Justice...share the wealth. If that is what you believe in great, but do not sit here and skew the facts. If you feel the wealthy needs to pay more just b/c GREAT, but again do not skew the argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With your infinite wisdom please tell us why corporations would CHOOSE to horde cash.

Because the public does not have the buying power to make them even more hordes of cash?

 

I am sure that once the public has more buying power that corporations will produce more and hire more to accomodate the need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With your infinite wisdom please tell us why corporations would CHOOSE to horde cash.

A lack of confidence in alternative investments and general fear of continued economic downturn. A lot of my clients who are sitting on cash don't know where they want to put it. The stock market is too volatile. Many fear the real estate market will continue to fall. Sometimes is better to make no investment than a bad investment.

 

Right now cash is king and a lot of folks are enjoying the safety of liquidity, deleveraging, and waiting for the right opportunity to get back into the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, very scientific analysis....Impressive... Typical ideological speak. In the face of reason, statistics, and scientific study, the other sides response is: NO, NOOO, NONONONONON, NO NO NO NO no no NO NO nnnnnnOOOOO, NNNNOOOOO , N -O. NO

 

EVEN OBAMA, do you hear me EVEN OBAMA agrees lower taxes increase tax revenues AND increases JOBS. The reason OBAMA (admittedly so!) wants to raise taxes is b/c it is more fair! Social Justice...share the wealth. If that is what you believe in great, but do not sit here and skew the facts. If you feel the wealthy needs to pay more just b/c GREAT, but again do not skew the argument.

 

Always the same. I have no clue why I waste my time.

 

No $hit, if you aren't going to bother answering the question, what is the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are people who listen, just not those two 'tards. :wacko:

 

And what pearl of wisdom that was included in the NOOONONONONONONO chants was there o wise brave, intrepid acolyte of Ayn Rand?

 

A question was asked, and grimm replied it with ideology.

 

You two should learn from Az. He tends to give very reasoned answers to questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what pearl of wisdom that was included in the NOOONONONONONONO chants was there o wise brave, intrepid acolyte of Ayn Rand?

 

A question was asked, and grimm replied it with ideology.

 

You two should learn from Az. He tends to give very reasoned answers to questions.

You might want to heed your own advice. Still waiting for your first post that gives a reasoned answer to a question. But hey, thanks for the advice. too bad you don't even come close to practicing what you preach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No $hit, if you aren't going to bother answering the question, what is the point.

 

There was a question? I just see folks deflecting the point of the Harvard study that reducing taxes does in fact increase revenues. I know the other side would rather just sit here and focus on nononono. If there is a question I am more than happy to answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might want to heed your own advice. Still waiting for your first post that gives a reasoned answer to a question. But hey, thanks for the advice. too bad you don't even come close to practicing what you preach.

 

:wacko: Thanks for stopping by Zeke! :tup:

 

Your contributions to discussion are (as always) insightful and much appreciated! Keep up the good work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tax receipts are at a historical low of 15% of GDP while spending is at 24% of GDP. Yes we need to cut spending, but we also need more revenues.

 

that is of course due to the lousy economy. CBO foresees a return to 18% of GDP and higher under current tax law over the next several years, which is where it was before the recession and right around where the historical average has been. the GOP stalwarts are saying that is enough money. I am mostly inclined to agree with them, however I think it's a probably little unrealistic given the coming baby boomer entitlement explosion. it would require cuts that the american people probably don't quite have the stomach for at this point. you just can't realistically fit all the entitlements the american people have come to expect, plus defense and everything else, into 18% of GDP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a question? I just see folks deflecting the point of the Harvard study that reducing taxes does in fact increase revenues. I know the other side would rather just sit here and focus on nononono. If there is a question I am more than happy to answer.

 

 

There were two of them you ignored. What made that even funnier is you started accusing others of ignoring reality, when the questions were based on real life actions and consequences of those real life actions.

 

The were two questions out of three sentences that you apparently missed. These questions were comprised of sentences that ended with the following symbol:

 

(?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information