OK - let's bring some data to the muddled discussion about tax cuts (which promises only to become more muddled as the election campaigns get in full battle mode). The latest person to make the claim that "tax cuts pay for themselves" is Gov. Tim Pawlenty (June 13 interview with Slate is here). Bruce Bartlett has a post that does a nice job (written for the Fiscal Times) refuting these claims. Bottom line, the data simply do not support the claim that tax cuts increase revenue. Mr. Pawlenty specifically mentions the administration of President Reagan in support of his view. But as Bruce Barlett points out (and notes that the officials in the Reagan administration never claimed the tax cuts would pay for themselves):
The fact is that the only metric that really matters is revenues as a share of the gross domestic product. By this measure, total federal revenues fell from 19.6 percent of GDP in 1981 to 18.4 percent of GDP by 1989. This suggests that revenues were $66 billion lower in 1989 as a result of Reagan’s policies.
Whether it is Democrats or Republicans, the notion that if you continue to repeat a falsehood long enough, people will simply tire of refuting it and go away is a disturbing strategy.
No comments:
Post a Comment