No need to bother. Found his WSJ editorial.Laffer seems to be longer on belief in the goodness of the plan than actual numbers. (It’ll work, I just know it will, if we all really believe!)
Mr. Bartlett’s skepticism is explained in better detail, and his view is more in line with what I have read elsewhere. Too little revenue and unfair to the poor. Bartlett does not share Laffer’s enthusiasm that jobs will flow from it. How does it address the demand problem in the economy?
The Tax Policy Center did seem to think that it could approach revenue neutrality.
Why can’t the tax code be simplified without sacrificing progressivity? Flat tax plans clearly shift the tax burden to those least able to pay.
Some of Laffer’s associates think that his plan ushered us into this trickle down mess.
No need to bother. Found his WSJ editorial.Laffer seems to be longer on belief in the goodness of the plan than actual numbers. (It’ll work, I just know it will, if we all really believe!)
Mr. Bartlett’s skepticism is explained in better detail, and his view is more in line with what I have read elsewhere. Too little revenue and unfair to the poor. Bartlett does not share Laffer’s enthusiasm that jobs will flow from it. How does it address the demand problem in the economy?
The Tax Policy Center did seem to think that it could approach revenue neutrality.
Why can’t the tax code be simplified without sacrificing progressivity? Flat tax plans clearly shift the tax burden to those least able to pay.
Some of Laffer’s associates think that his plan ushered us into this trickle down mess.
OK. Your turn.