I'm not sure we have anyone in D.C. capable of that.China controls their economy. To have more control, we would have to be more like China. Not sure we want that.
I noted the problem with simply putting more money into the markets. It's why I support raising Capital Gains tax to be equal with income tax. In this case I'd even be good with it being higher. Put it in the markets and pay 30% rate or put it into the business and pay 18% rate. (or nothing)We've linked before what business does with tax cuts.
Although we would expect tax cuts to bolster the economy, empirical evidence shows that they typically don't. Tax cuts to the rich are more likely to promote investment bubbles than job creation. Tax incentives to corporations frequently promote job destroying choices, or simply become handouts to the executives and the investors.
why tax cuts don't create jobs
I'm also good with the arguement of lowering taxes so that the government has less to throw around. Seems to me that South Dakota's unemployment rate is pretty low right now which would mean that there are many influences on unemployment.Florida has the fifth lowest corporate income tax rate in the country at 5.5 percent, trailing only South Dakota, Alaska, Wyoming and Nevada — states hardly in Florida's league. Yet Florida's unemployment rate remains far higher than the 9.1 percent national average. Recently, both a Tax Foundation study and University of Central Florida economist Sean Snaith have argued that reducing taxes has no discernible impact on job growth.
New Yorks rate is 7.9%. South Dakota's is 4.5%. Illinois is over 10%. Wyomings is 5.8%. Seems Florida is an anomolyIt's not hard to find evidence to support such a view. Other states with much higher corporate tax rates — Connecticut, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey — all enjoy significantly lower jobless numbers, as well as hosting the corporate headquarters of many more Fortune 500 companies per capita.
Tax cuts don't create jobs - Tampa Bay Times
GM was done to pay back the unions.They are that,. but not uncommon as to what is done with our appeasment of business.
You do not have to have evidence of anything to allow people to keep more of their money.And while I agree with you that one may be worse than the other, we curently do both. And when you lower their taxes, which largely doesn't amount to enough to actually make a major difference even if used, you have to have some evidence that they actually hire people. That evidence doesn't really exist. The evidence is all over the board, and u=suggests that other factors, not taxes, play a far larger role.