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
 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
26. Funny the piece discusses Sweden...
Sun Sep 9, 2012, 11:21 AM
Sep 2012

"Higher taxes have succeeded in increasing government revenue in small, homogeneous countries such as Sweden and Finland."

Small and homogenous...that's not us.

Recommendations

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

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
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No matter what the Maximu...»Reply #26