"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message

You're talking about tax dollars being fewer, I talking about tax rates
being lower. Raising them to far is a disincentive to investment and
saving. Lowering stimulates investment and spending and saving, thereby
increasing employment and taxpayers.

There you go again about supply-side economics. Did you know that the only
country in the world where supply-side economics have actually worked is
India? Do you know why? Because approximately 1% of the population pays
taxes.

Why supply-side economics will never work in a country like America is
documented quite brilliantly in David Stockman's book (he's the guy who
invented, and eventually got disillusioned, by it), but I will give you a
brief synopsis.

In the United States, the majority of the country pays taxes, therefore
lowering the tax rate is not going to be a further incentive to people to
pay their taxes, because they're paying them in any case.

If the people need any incentive at all, it's simplifying the tax code (a
Republican policy that I, and any sane person, will in implicit agreement
with).

First of all I think the Kennedy, Reagan and Bush tax cuts have shown that
lowering taxes works. Naturally I won't be happy until income tax is
reduced to zero.

India is a nightmare of socialistic nonsense, the last I heard it takes a
year to get a business license, as opposed to Hong Kong where it takes about
an hour.

Making the tax code simpler is certainly a good start, there's no reason it
needs to be any longer than an average person can remember, not 28 volumes
or whatever it is now. There's a reason so many Senators and Congressmen
tend to be lawyers. Who else could dream this **** up.