What's the Matter With Kansas? It's broke.

[dismal]

No kidding. The Laffer Curve? That Laffer Curve makes no pronouncements other than "'ehh".

The Laffer Curve may make no pronouncements (lol) but Arthur Laffer sure does.

http://cjonline.com/news/2012-01-19/laffer-tax-plan-could-create-state-prosperity
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/researc...ffers-supplyside-economics-staging-a-comeback

I did not see the spot in there where Laffer claimed the Kansas tax cuts would raise revenues. Can you quote it for me?

 

[ksen]

The Laffer Curve may make no pronouncements (lol) but Arthur Laffer sure does.

http://cjonline.com/news/2012-01-19/laffer-tax-plan-could-create-state-prosperity
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/researc...ffers-supplyside-economics-staging-a-comeback

I did not see the spot in there where Laffer claimed the Kansas tax cuts would raise revenues. Can you quote it for me?

“If it continues in the direction that he’s going, I think you can really create a state of prosperity here in Kansas,” [Laffer] said.

There you go, unless you want to maintain that the guy who invented the Laffer Curve (lower taxes = higher tax revenues) did not include government tax receipts in the phrase "create a state of prosperity."

 

[dismal]

I did not see the spot in there where Laffer claimed the Kansas tax cuts would raise revenues. Can you quote it for me?

“If it continues in the direction that he’s going, I think you can really create a state of prosperity here in Kansas,” [Laffer] said.

There you go, unless you want to maintain that the guy who invented the Laffer Curve (lower taxes = higher tax revenues) did not include government tax receipts in the phrase "create a state of prosperity."

You're not seriously attempting to argue that by "prosperity" he means "higher tax receipts" are you?

Cause that would seem a touch desperate.

 

[ksen]

“If it continues in the direction that he’s going, I think you can really create a state of prosperity here in Kansas,” [Laffer] said.

There you go, unless you want to maintain that the guy who invented the Laffer Curve (lower taxes = higher tax revenues) did not include government tax receipts in the phrase "create a state of prosperity."

You're not seriously attempting to argue that by "prosperity" he means "higher tax receipts" are you?

Cause that would seem a touch desperate.

I do agree that one of us is appearing desperate.

 

[dismal]

“If it continues in the direction that he’s going, I think you can really create a state of prosperity here in Kansas,” [Laffer] said.

There you go, unless you want to maintain that the guy who invented the Laffer Curve (lower taxes = higher tax revenues) did not include government tax receipts in the phrase "create a state of prosperity."

You're not seriously attempting to argue that by "prosperity" he means "higher tax receipts" are you?

Cause that would seem a touch desperate.

I do agree that one of us is appearing desperate.

Well, good. Common ground.

 

[ksen]

:fistbump:

 

[dismal]

If you keep arguing things like Arthur Laffer, of all people, defines "prosperity" as that state in which the government takes in the most taxes we can look forward to many such agreements in the future. Given his whole schtick is that taxes are a drag on prosperity and all.

 

[Ford]

If you keep arguing things like Arthur Laffer, of all people, defines "prosperity" as that state in which the government takes in the most taxes we can look forward to many such agreements in the future. Given his whole schtick is that taxes are a drag on prosperity and all.

So you deny that the idea behind lowering taxes in Kansas was to promote economic growth?


Because that's what we seem to be arguing here...not what Laffer himself might have said...but rather that lower taxes on the "job creators," less regulation, and smaller government in general would lead to prosperity.

A side effect of that prosperity - again not according to Laffer, but the Kansas GOP - would be increased revenues that, coupled with significant budget cuts would alleviate the budgetary woes of the state government.


Your insistence that a quote to this effect from Laffer must be provided is a red herring. At issue is the Kansas experiment (and Brownback has called it that himself) in I guess what we'd call Grover Norquist-ian economics and whether or not it works.

Last time I checked, Kansas was not outstripping the rest of the nation in job growth in the private sector, and is most certainly not into the black as far as the state budget goes. Yet Kansas is supposed to be the model for proving these policies (cut taxes, cut regulation, cut government) work better than all the "liberal" policies. Instead of trying to squeeze a quote from a turnip, could you please explain why this is not the case? Or at least admit you're not trying to defend Brownback's experiment?

 

[Tigers!]

Perhaps Kansas should sell red shoes?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

“If it continues in the direction that he’s going, I think you can really create a state of prosperity here in Kansas,” [Laffer] said.

There you go, unless you want to maintain that the guy who invented the Laffer Curve (lower taxes = higher tax revenues) did not include government tax receipts in the phrase "create a state of prosperity."

You're not seriously attempting to argue that by "prosperity" he means "higher tax receipts" are you? Prosperous corporations always pay less in taxes when they make more profits.

Cause that would seem a touch desperate.

I do agree that one of us is appearing desperate.

Yeah, somehow there can be statewide prosperity and dropping tax revenue. Corporations always pay less in taxes when they make more profit.

The state treasury took in $5 million less than expected in oil and gas tax revenue, $7.8 million less than anticipated in sales and use tax receipts and $8.2 million below projections on corporate income tax payments. Overall, the state collected $11.2 million less than hoped.

Yup, drops in sales and use tax receipts are a great indicator of prosperity! (as a note, this tax was not cut)

 

[dismal]

If you keep arguing things like Arthur Laffer, of all people, defines "prosperity" as that state in which the government takes in the most taxes we can look forward to many such agreements in the future. Given his whole schtick is that taxes are a drag on prosperity and all.

So you deny that the idea behind lowering taxes in Kansas was to promote economic growth?

Promote growth not = raise tax revenues.

What's up with you guys?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Well, let's look at the promote growth argument. What sectors is it promoting growth? Investment in non-Kansas stocks?

 

[dismal]

Well, let's look at the promote growth argument. What sectors is it promoting growth? Investment in non-Kansas stocks?

How would higher income taxes help growth?

There is a general axiom: that which you tax you get less of.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Well, let's look at the promote growth argument. What sectors is it promoting growth? Investment in non-Kansas stocks?

How would higher income taxes help growth?

There is a general axiom: that which you tax you get less of.

I was actually hoping You'd explain to us why tax cuts help growth and in what sectors.

 

[dismal]

How would higher income taxes help growth?

There is a general axiom: that which you tax you get less of.

I was actually hoping You'd explain to us why tax cuts help growth and in what sectors.

Sounds like you are lacking some basic foundational knowledge in economics. You could try googling "taxes and deadweight loss". Here are a few hits you could start with:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_burden_of_taxation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss
https://www.khanacademy.org/economi...oss-tutorial/v/taxation-and-dead-weight-loss#!

 

[ksen]

So you deny that the idea behind lowering taxes in Kansas was to promote economic growth?

Promote growth not = raise tax revenues.

What's up with you guys?

What's up with you contradicting Reagan?

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=37302

Now, none of this happened by accident. The economy is expanding because from the beginning we made it clear that one of the prime motivating intentions of this administration was to get the economy going again. And it was clear the way to do that was cut tax rates, stop penalizing initiative, and sit back and watch the fireworks. All of us have benefited. The poverty statistics show John Kennedy was right when he said, following his own tax cuts, a rising tide lifts all boats.

 

[dismal]

Promote growth not = raise tax revenues.

What's up with you guys?

What's up with you contradicting Reagan?

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=37302

Now, none of this happened by accident. The economy is expanding because from the beginning we made it clear that one of the prime motivating intentions of this administration was to get the economy going again. And it was clear the way to do that was cut tax rates, stop penalizing initiative, and sit back and watch the fireworks. All of us have benefited. The poverty statistics show John Kennedy was right when he said, following his own tax cuts, a rising tide lifts all boats.

I understand you love and worship Reagan and wish to appeal to his authority, but that statement is a) also not about Kansas and b) also does not talk about increasing tax revenues

 

[Rhea]

So, the answer is no, you don't have any examples of anyone actually saying this particular tax cut would raise revenues?

http://www.kansaspolicy.org/KPIBlog/117061.aspx

This article is hysterically funny. I like best this gem...

KLRD estimates that General Fund revenue will be 9.6 percent higher in five years. FY 2014 is the first full year of income tax reform; revenue is 7.1 percent lower this year than the record-setting level of 2012 but it is actually 1.3 percent higher than three years ago! Even more remarkable, a new revenue record is predicted to be set in FY 2018 – just four years after historic tax reform was fully implemented.

I dare you to find one media outlet in Kansas reporting these remarkable facts. To the contrary, most media and their big-government allies cling to versions of CBPP’s ‘sky is falling’ mentality.

So much funny, like 1.3% higher than the bad years before the good years!
But best of all is, "We predict! And no one is reporting it as fact!" bwaaa haaa haaa!

 

[ksen]

What's up with you contradicting Reagan?

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=37302

Now, none of this happened by accident. The economy is expanding because from the beginning we made it clear that one of the prime motivating intentions of this administration was to get the economy going again. And it was clear the way to do that was cut tax rates, stop penalizing initiative, and sit back and watch the fireworks. All of us have benefited. The poverty statistics show John Kennedy was right when he said, following his own tax cuts, a rising tide lifts all boats.

I understand you love and worship Reagan and wish to appeal to his authority, but that statement is a) also not about Kansas and b) also does not talk about increasing tax revenues

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I was actually hoping You'd explain to us why tax cuts help growth and in what sectors.

Sounds like you are lacking some basic foundational knowledge in economics. You could try googling "taxes and deadweight loss". Here are a few hits you could start with:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_burden_of_taxation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss
https://www.khanacademy.org/economi...oss-tutorial/v/taxation-and-dead-weight-loss#!

Thank you, but I already have an extensive foundation in Economics. Perhaps you can focus and answer my query or remain silent and let someone who is willing to discuss this more in depth avoid such "Econ 101" arguments.

Let me repeat more specifically:
Let's look at the taxes promote growth argument that is playing out in Kansas. What sectors is it actually promoting growth? Or is it primarily investment in financial markets that have little to do with Kansas? Is this "lost" tax revenue being spent in the state in quantities that are causing growth, and if so what sectors?