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

[PyramidHead]

Well, maybe your understanding of taxes should take who gets taxed into account. I'm pretty sure nobody actually suggested that higher taxes on anyone, anywhere, by any amount, is necessarily a path to prosperity. On the other hand, the inverse of that statement--that lowering taxes almost always leads to more prosperity--is something real people actually believe.

You need to take this up with the people who attributed all the action on that chart to the tax cut. They are the ones in the business of asserting what tax causes what. If you check the transcript I'll be the one gently mocking them for attributing all manner of causation on those charts to this one thing.

As far as I can tell, the people you are talking about are mostly registering their disagreement with the opinion "tax cuts will result in higher revenues and more economic prosperity," whether in Kansas or in general. It's possible to disagree with an opinion without implying that the exact opposite must be true.

 

[KeepTalking]

Are the taxes that were cut the same as the taxes that were later raised? Do they affect the same people in the same economic situation?

As I understand it taxes act more like a slider in Civilization IV. You jack them up and prosperity ensues. Although for some reason Sid Meier got this backwards.

Not really, as it depends on what you mean by prosperity. Since there is no unit of prosperity in the Civ franchise (there actually isn't a tax rate either, but I will go with your analogy), the closest thing would be money, and jacking up the tax rate (in an empire simulation that uses a tax rate) certainly increases the amount of money flowing in to your empire, at the cost of happiness.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

If you cared it would not be hard to figure out. Since you don't care there seems to be little point in discussion.

On that I agree.