05-15-2011, 04:31 PM
Ted I disagree with your take on Gwaltney's article, which is narrowly focused on one aspect of supply side economics: the top tax rate. His thesis was this:
"Supply-side economics provided the political and theoretical foundations for what became a remarkable change in the tax structure of the United States and other countries throughout the world. The view that changes in tax rates exert an impact on total output and that marginal rates in excess of 40 percent exert a destructive influence on the incentive of people to work and use resources wisely is now widely accepted by both economists and policymakers. This change in thinking is the major legacy of supply-side economics."
He used at least 9 pieces of empirical data to make his case. Did you miss them because they weren't in graph or chart form? (just kidding there buddy.)
I think the problem here is that you are looking for a different outcome from supply side economics than the supply-siders themselves are. You want to hear more about how this type of policy impacts average or poor Americans, and that is not the focus of the Gwaltney article.
"Supply-side economics provided the political and theoretical foundations for what became a remarkable change in the tax structure of the United States and other countries throughout the world. The view that changes in tax rates exert an impact on total output and that marginal rates in excess of 40 percent exert a destructive influence on the incentive of people to work and use resources wisely is now widely accepted by both economists and policymakers. This change in thinking is the major legacy of supply-side economics."
He used at least 9 pieces of empirical data to make his case. Did you miss them because they weren't in graph or chart form? (just kidding there buddy.)
I think the problem here is that you are looking for a different outcome from supply side economics than the supply-siders themselves are. You want to hear more about how this type of policy impacts average or poor Americans, and that is not the focus of the Gwaltney article.