Not enough people know about the Laffer Curver, or the basic principle that increased taxation leads to an increased incentive to avoid taxes.
When it was, there were huge loopholes and exemptions, and as a result the amount of tax actually collected was about the same as it is now.pic.twitter.com/nKDIkZUqDW
-
-
-
The goal should be to increase revenues while mitigating the disincentive to wealth creation. The goal of increasing taxation or equality ignores second order consequences.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Paul's tweet is more accurate than yours. Your graph shows the percentage of "taxable income" collected as tax. But the definition of taxable income, and what's included in that, has changed a lot.
- Show replies
-
-
-
There would be a lot of this if a wealth tax were passed, too. The point is moot however since such a tax will not be passed.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Using total tax collected in this argument assumes that the tax code is similarly progressive today and that income cohorts are the same today as they were in the past. Both of of these things are false.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Perhaps, but collected from whom? Also, why presume that loopholes and exemptions would be part of an improved taxation scheme? Many other countries have very simple tax codes that work well.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It would be interesting to see this graph with stacked area below showing where those receipts came from - which income quintiles, business taxes, etc.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.