FN, you've got to wean yourself from the Hertiage Foundation and other conservative thinktanks. There are a huge amount of variables that can affect the national economy and its components. Specifically, I've always observed that, given a lower capit
Do you consider this nation's system of University business colleges to be conservative think-tanks? If so I'd have to question your motives. I'm talking about strict quantitative economic analysis that is unpartial and unbiased. I see your point about circulation so then why not promote business expansion and growth instead of simply raising taxes which inevitably results in a redistribution of wealth to the poor who in many cases will simply squander it away.
Originally Posted By: Lilo
The 1993 Clinton tax policies were anathema to Republicans at the time. They hated them and said so loudly. They all predicted doom and gloom, rising deficits, higher interest rates, and basically the end of Western civilization as we knew it. And yet the exact opposite happened.
Usually when reality doesn't fit with a theory that means the theory needs adjusting.
Ole Billy did a great job of balancing the budget but as I noted above the economy improved a point per year in the later 90's after the Republican tax cuts took hold in 97 offseting Clinton's tax hikes of '93. We can raise taxes on the rich and give it to the poor, or we can continue to reinvest the money in the largest economy in the world and help us ALL. The economy was already set to boom at the turn of the internet age and there's nothing to indicate that tax hikes help anyone.
Originally Posted By: Lilo
If you want to argue that tax cuts are in and of themselves stimulative, you would have to explain why despite greater tax cuts and associated deregulation, we have had such poor economic growth under the second President Bush where Republicans had the Senate, House and Presidency and had free reign to put their theories into practice.
September 11th and the literal destruction of our financial center. No matter who or what was responsible for the boom of the 90's (in both the first AND second half of the decade) the data I presented above shows clearly the nation would have continued on a path of economic prosperity until that fateful day in September.
