Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)

3. dkf is a panicking conservative

Reply to Scuba (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 9, 2012, 08:47 AM

Sep 2012

He was hoping for an "I told you so" election night, but it's slipping away. So, naturally, the increasingly transparent ramping up of neocon economics and Friedmanism in all its sundry forms.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

37 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

No matter what the Maximum tax rate has been, we've never collected much more than 20% of GDP [View all] dkf Sep 2012 OP

Why would a progressive with years on DU still be falling for the much-discredited Laffer curve? Scuba Sep 2012 #1

This is just reality. It seems like pretty straight forward data to me. dkf Sep 2012 #2

Why would you post such drivel? Scuba Sep 2012 #4

I'm not giving you theoretical economics...these are results and data. dkf Sep 2012 #8

If the gap between federal expenses and tax receipts is the problem bhikkhu Sep 2012 #31

dkf is a panicking conservative alcibiades_mystery Sep 2012 #3

Nailed it. Scuba Sep 2012 #5

Just trying to inject some reality. I don't know why that is considered Neocon or whatever. dkf Sep 2012 #7

Looks like madokie Sep 2012 #6

I didn't give Clinton enough credit when we were living through his terms. dkf Sep 2012 #9

Unlike me I was totally caught up in Clintonism madokie Sep 2012 #25

Uhh...according to your own data, we're not even collecting that much. strategery blunder Sep 2012 #10

Oh I fully agree with going back to Clinton rates. dkf Sep 2012 #11

Your OP bore no such qualification strategery blunder Sep 2012 #15

I tend to want the data or piece to speak for itself. dkf Sep 2012 #17

Why bother to post it then? strategery blunder Sep 2012 #22

The author (research intern) of the article is doubtless not an expert. LiberalFighter Sep 2012 #12

She is a research analyst not research intern. Geez. dkf Sep 2012 #14

It is still hogwash to suggest that they are only able to collect taxes at about the 20% GDP rate. LiberalFighter Sep 2012 #36

Nah, the percentage collected rose under both Reagan and Shrub Progressive dog Sep 2012 #13

That is what is quite striking. All those changes in rates and different payroll taxes and dkf Sep 2012 #16

Seems the argument is a stupid straw man. ProSense Sep 2012 #19

Indeed, the article contradicts its OWN data strategery blunder Sep 2012 #23

No it is not striking unless 20% is a magic number Progressive dog Sep 2012 #21

Let me explain. dawg Sep 2012 #18

Funny the piece discusses Sweden... dkf Sep 2012 #26

You are being intentionally misleading. dawg Sep 2012 #29

Just trolling as always. Why the fuck it's still allowed to post here is beyond me.nt Guy Whitey Corngood Sep 2012 #33

Shows how well Clinton did PowerToThePeople Sep 2012 #20

A lot more people were paying more in taxes and dkf Sep 2012 #27

Let me see if I have this right... DippyDem Sep 2012 #24

You have it exactly right tkmorris Sep 2012 #28

Wotta load of crap hfojvt Sep 2012 #30

More conservacrap from the "loyal opposition". Egalitarian Thug Sep 2012 #32

This is Art Laffer BS. Odin2005 Sep 2012 #34

"The 1933 founded libertarian institute located in Great Barrington, Massachusetts, conducts Guy Whitey Corngood Sep 2012 #35

What's missing here is a graph of GDP over the same period. NashvilleLefty Sep 2012 #37