I'm all for cutting taxes. But there has to be some sort of spending cut to coincide with it as well. Kansas is an example of your theory not working. Brownback cut corporate taxes and the state basically went bankrupt. It didn't have the trickle down effect people were hoping for.
So where do you want to cut spending at? Are you in favor of Trump's wall? Do you want to cut military spending? Welfare spending? There has to be some balance here.
But if you are disagreeing. Most of this comes from the folks that are not for TDT, of course. But as the other side will claim, rightly so, it is not a closed system. There was/is a reason Kansas was put in this situation. There are also many examples of successes. So, even if one example did not work it would not make it something to totally abandon in all cases. But you have to examine whether or not it really did not work and/or if it was given a legitimate shot at success. You will always have folks that are gleeful to jump at any chance to denounce something they do not want to see work when it appears to struggle; but they rarely admit when they are pleasantly surprised at a time when it did work. It is just human nature, especially when something is not done in a lab-environment.
Here is a very simple article that retorts to one opinion piece about Kansas. Read it and follow through with researching what some of the Econ guys say online pro and con. Then let me know from a pro-standpoint --- not a con-view --- what you think.
I'm all for cutting taxes. But there has to be some sort of spending cut to coincide with it as well. Kansas is an example of your theory not working. Brownback cut corporate taxes and the state basically went bankrupt. It didn't have the trickle down effect people were hoping for.
So where do you want to cut spending at? Are you in favor of Trump's wall? Do you want to cut military spending? Welfare spending? There has to be some balance here.
But if you are disagreeing. Most of this comes from the folks that are not for TDT, of course. But as the other side will claim, rightly so, it is not a closed system. There was/is a reason Kansas was put in this situation. There are also many examples of successes. So, even if one example did not work it would not make it something to totally abandon in all cases. But you have to examine whether or not it really did not work and/or if it was given a legitimate shot at success. You will always have folks that are gleeful to jump at any chance to denounce something they do not want to see work when it appears to struggle; but they rarely admit when they are pleasantly surprised at a time when it did work. It is just human nature, especially when something is not done in a lab-environment.
Here is a very simple article that retorts to one opinion piece about Kansas. Read it and follow through with researching what some of the Econ guys say online pro and con. Then let me know from a pro-standpoint --- not a con-view --- what you think.
Hot Forum Topics
