Everything you posted is partisan "hackery" from elite socialists who have a different vision for this country than our Founders. Still waiting for an answer, what is Krugman's view as to the role of this country
What I posted are verifiable facts. Is "correlation does not equal causation" come out of the liberal playbook in an attempt to demonize tax rate cuts for Americans thus keeping people dependent? Whether or not there is a correlation is irrelevant to me because tax rate cuts have happened four times in U.S. History and everytime they increased govt. revenue and strong economic growth. My suggestion is to stop with the theory, stop with the elitist attitude, stop with reporting economic theory and actually get the facts.
Where does human behavior place in the liberal world? Simple question would you prefer one person paying 1000 in taxes or 2 people paying 500 each? Which would have a bigger impact on the economy?
Why did U.S. Spending grow following tax cuts? Hmmm, let me see, what do you do when you get to keep more of what you "earn." There are four components to GDP, Go to BEA.gov, the link I gave you and find out those components and look at the part imports and exports played in our GDP, hint it was a negative since we have a trade deficit. You are making this way too easy.
It has become obvious to me that you have spent way too much time listening and reading economic theory that you ignore the basics of economic growth. I posted the Bush years showing economic growth then the affects of the recession which started after the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007. Nice spin and dodge, you tell me how GDP grew over 4 trillion dollars and any time in U.S. history when the GDP grew that much? You are the one that said the Bush tax cuts didn't have any affect on the economy. Something did so why don't you tell me what caused the spike in GDP?
According to NPER we entered a recession in October 2000 and then were hit with 9/11 which of course you ignore. Tax receipts dropped between 2001-2003 which again you ignored. Tax rate cuts took place in July 2003.
none of which had anything to do with tax rate cuts that grew govt. revenue.
Not accurate? Complain to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the U.S. Treasury Dept. That is where the data came from. Maybe Paul Krugman can set them straight.
You are truly a legend in your own mind. Why did that weath disappear? What did tax rate cuts have to do with that? What created the collapse is the belief that it is a right for everyone to own a home, one that they cannot afford. There are never any consequences for failure in the liberal world.
Still waiting for you to actually explain how GDP grew after the JFK, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts as did Govt. revenue?
LOL, thanks for the good laugh.
Here is a good analysis of the Obama "tax cuts"
Obama's 95% Illusion - WSJ.com
Imagine that, unemployment affects tax revenue. Who would have thought it? I guess on the opposite side increased employment woud create more taxpayers? Hmmm, Reagan created almost 20 million with his tax cuts. Bush tax cuts increased employment as well. how did the Obama tax cuts do?
Yeah, I am dense, dense enough to have no interest in anything a socialist economist or another elite liberal has to say. What inflation was there during the Bush Administration? What inflation was there during the Reagan years?
The dense one is anyone who believes what an elite economists has to say yet ignores human behavior and the affects the consumer has on the economy.
You are absolutely right, actual numbers mean nothing to an elitist who makes up the theory as they go along, thanks so much for the education:rofl
Then tell me what you do and 150 million others in this country do when they get to keep more of their money? Explain to me how GDP Grew, Govt revenue grew, job creation grew AFTER tax rate cuts?
Great, you are 26 years old and have it all figured out. Your book smart, street stupid mentality will lead you to the disaster that is liberalism. Get out into the real world. I am 63, ran a 200 million dollar business than employed 2000 people. You could do better by listening to the more experienced, people that actually generated economic results vs. those economists that haven't contributed a damn thing except hot air. Adopting their theory will keep you dependent on the govt. for a long time.
LOL, if you are 26 you were 3-4 years old when the fall of the Soviet Union occurred. Now I understand that there are history books but not sure what is in them because Gorbachev was the head of the Soviet Union. You may have missed that point so I suggest you call him or write him and tell him how wrong he was to admit that Reagan destroyed the Soviet Union.
You are right, I forgot, data from bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S Treasury are trumped by elite economists like Krugman. Man, you need to choose your mentors better.
You have no problem posting opinions of others and lead us to believe you support those opinions.
why don't you and misterman get a room?
I am enjoying the many years of hard work and individual wealth creation. I appreciate you now paying for my SS. After contributing for 35 years and paying for someone else's I am extremely grateful for your contributions now.
Paul Krugman is laughing is arse off at people like you. He is getting rich off people like you but you aren't smart enough to recognize the hogwash he is giving you.
