[net.politics] Supply-side Economics: the myth of "increased revenues"

orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (11/08/85)

From Tom Hill, repeating well-established myths: 
> Well Tim,  the tax revenues have gone up since the tax breaks and that
> I believe was the thrust behind the bill.  Less taxes for the wealthy
> means more investment and guess what?  that is exactly what we have seen.
> Stop running off at the mouth simply because you can't stand T.C.
> 
I have posted this before so I will simply summarize the *facts* as
presented in a New York Times article, Sept. 18,1984:
  
  1)Tax revenues have *not* gone up.  Here are the facts:
     1981                      1982
    $284.1 billion,        $276.9 billion
     
    This does not account for inflation nor the increase one would
    expect from the economy's normal rate of growth.  Why do you
    think we have hundred billion dollar deficits???
 
  2)The savings rate has steadily declined.  The rate reported for
    last month was 1.2% - the lowest rate in decades.
    That was reported in the New York Times last week as it was
    announced by the government.
 
  3)Investment has *not* led the recovery.  In fact investment spending
    as a percentage of GNP is six-tenths of a percent *below* the
    12.1% level in the third quarter of 1981.
    Moreover, consumption spending now accounts for 62.9% of GNP:
    it accounted for only 62% of GNP in the summer of 1981.
    (all reported in NYT, Sept. 18,1984)

These are not myths but facts.  I believe social policy should
be based upon facts rather than fanciful notions about miraculously
increasing revenues by reducing taxes.
 
               tim sevener  whuxn!orb

thill@ssc-bee.UUCP (Tom Hill) (11/11/85)

> From Tom Hill, repeating well-established myths: 
> > Well Tim,  the tax revenues have gone up since the tax breaks and that
> > I believe was the thrust behind the bill.  Less taxes for the wealthy
> > means more investment and guess what?  that is exactly what we have seen.
> > Stop running off at the mouth simply because you can't stand T.C.
> > 
> I have posted this before so I will simply summarize the *facts* as
> presented in a New York Times article, Sept. 18,1984:
>   
>   1)Tax revenues have *not* gone up.  Here are the facts:
>      1981                      1982
>     $284.1 billion,        $276.9 billion
>      
	Well Tim, since our revenues were over 700 billion I am wondering
	where you got these figures?  Care to post a source?

>  
>   2)The savings rate has steadily declined.  The rate reported for
>     last month was 1.2% - the lowest rate in decades.
>     That was reported in the New York Times last week as it was
>     announced by the government.
>  

Oh quit this drivel and read an econ book.

>   3)Investment has *not* led the recovery.  In fact investment spending
>     as a percentage of GNP is six-tenths of a percent *below* the
>     12.1% level in the third quarter of 1981.
>     Moreover, consumption spending now accounts for 62.9% of GNP:
>     it accounted for only 62% of GNP in the summer of 1981.
>     (all reported in NYT, Sept. 18,1984)
> 
> These are not myths but facts.  I believe social policy should
> be based upon facts rather than fanciful notions about miraculously
> increasing revenues by reducing taxes.
>  
>                tim sevener  whuxn!orb

You misplace you facts, as usual.  Your poor little fingers must be getting
tired.


	Tom Hill