Mitch McConnell versus 衬套 economists

参议院少数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔（Mitch McConnell）昨天 重复 the all-too-common claim that tax 切s increase government revenue:

That's been the majority Republican view for some time... [t]hat there's no evidence whatsoever that the 衬套 tax 切s actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax 切s 在里面 经济. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject.

However, as I've 重复ly pointed out, virtually every credible economist disagrees. Even 衬套 administration economists 重复ly found the courage to disavow the claims of their political superiors -- here's 回顾:

-在CEA主席的2003年经济报告中 写 that "[a]lthough the 经济 grows in response to tax reductions... it is unlikely to grow so much that lost tax revenue is completely recovered by the higher level of economic activity."

在2003年的参议院确认听证会上，格雷格·曼基夫（Greg Mankiw） 问 关于成长俱乐部主席斯蒂芬·摩尔反对他的提名。曼奇夫回应说，摩尔在批评“ [曼奇夫的著作]中的一段话，我对皇冠手机app下载网址会带来如此多的就业增长以至完全依靠自筹资金的说法表示怀疑。对此我仍然持怀疑态度。”

-管理和预算办公室《 2006年中期评估》中包含的财政部分析 总结 that the tax 切s will not pay for themselves in even the most optimistic scenario. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 写财政部发现，“从长远来看，使总统的皇冠手机app下载网址政策永久化，并通过未来减少支出来支付皇冠手机app下载网址政策，最终可能最终使经济产出（国民收入）增加多达0.7％。如果最终使永久性皇冠手机app下载网址最终导致经济产出水平提高0.7％，那么这种假定的额外经济增长的效果将仅抵消总统皇冠手机app下载网址成本的一小部分。”

-CEA主席Ed Lazear 告诉 the Washington Times in September 2006 that "We do not say that the tax 切s pay for themselves."

Presumably these people are not biased against conservatives or tax 切s. And yet their findings and conclusions are ignored, and the magical thinking persists.

更新7/15 6:29 AM: Derek Thompson at 的Atlantic 已编译 一个类似的列表，其中包括以下附加引号：

2) 的chair of CEA from 2003-2005, 格雷格·曼考：“一些供应方喜欢声称税收的扭曲效应 如此之大，以至于提高税率会减少税收。最喜欢 经济学家，我认为该结论对大多数加税都不可信， 我怀疑鲍尔森先生也不会。”

3) He's right! Hank Paulson, 衬套's last Treasury Secretary, 不: "As a general rule, I don't believe that tax 切s pay for themselves."

4）该意见得到了 安德鲁·桑威克, Chief Economist on Council of Economic Advisers, 2003-2004: "No thoughtful person believes that this possible offset [the 衬套 tax 切s] more than compensated for the first effect for these tax 切s. Not a single one."...

5）...并且 爱德华·拉泽尔, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers in 2007: "I certainly would not claim that tax 切s pay for themselves."

Comments

[David in Cal]

布伦丹写道： 参议院少数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔（Mitch McConnell）昨天 重复 the all-too-common claim that tax 切s increase government revenue. 不完全的。让'比较三个评论：

1. 的衬套 tax 切s increased revenue
2. All tax 切s increase revenue
3. If extended indefinitely, the 衬套 tax 切s would increase revenue.

麦康奈尔说＃1。布伦丹's quote incorrectly attributes #2 to McConnell. 的link to Horney disputes #3.

事实是，那里'无法证明因果关系。尽管（或由于）较低的税率，2007财年的联邦所得税收入仍比2001年高出34％。在那个时期，经济增长如此之快，以致在很大程度上抵消了较低的税率。

如果不降低税率，经济会增长得一样快吗？谁知道？那里'没有可以回答这个问题的对照实验。我们可以't re-run history. Those who assert that 衬套'较低的税率增加税收收入可以't prove they'对。那些主张降低税率的人没有'增加税收可以't prove they're right, either.

[David in Cal]

另请注意Brendan的此评论's first link:

尽管今年收入大增，但美国政府仍预计2007财年收入增速将急剧下降至2.4％，这在很大程度上是由于国会大幅度削减了替代性最低税率。

的person quoted (Mr. Lazear) was explaining why he doubted that tax 切s would increase tax revenue. One reason for his doubt was that he expected 2007 to show tax revenue growth of only a 2.4%.

事实证明，2007年联邦所得税收入的实际增长为14％！意外的收入激增使拉泽尔先生有些怀疑'的观点，部分基于更悲观的假设。

[David in Cal]

布伦丹说， 大概这些人[布什's ecnomists] are not biased against conservatives or tax 切s...

I think he implies that if 衬套's economists err, they will err on the side of supporting the efficacy of 衬套's policies.

这似乎合乎逻辑，但是没有't always work out that way. In the comment above, note that 衬套'的经济学家大大低估了2007年税收收入的增长。

[约托奇]

Brendan, I believe this was a well thought out and well written article. I believe that any more tax 切s will hurt our 经济.

[David in Cal]

I'm unimpressed by the addtional cites. Four of them are statements made before the explosion in tax revenues began in FY 2005. A judgment about 衬套'在税收激增开始之前制定的经济战略，比对他的伊拉克激增成功之前做出的伊拉克战略的判断没有任何根据。第五条评论质疑皇冠手机app下载网址是否可以增加一般征收的税款，但事实并非如此'解决这个特殊的皇冠手机app下载网址措施。

无论如何，我'我不清楚布伦丹's point. It's impossible to prove whether or not 衬套's tax 切s increased tax revenue. Some say they did; some say they didn't; some say they don'不知道。因此...什么？

At least 衬套'的皇冠手机app下载网址措施据称增加了收入，而实际上却大幅增加了收入。奥巴马总统更令人难以置信'声称创造了数百万个工作岗位， 减少了 百万。

再次考虑，也许布伦丹（Brendan）巧妙地用自己来证明自己的论点。当他最初写论文时，从2005财政年度开始，联邦kncome税收收入就出现了大幅增长。't begun. (The 10-year pattern is shown below.) So it was reasonable for Brendan to believe that 衬套'皇冠手机app下载网址显然没有't increase revenue.

Subsequently, Brendan has resolutely ignored the the enormous jump in tax revenues that began in FY 2005 and continued through FY 2007. His unwillingness to let additional 事实s change his mind illustrates his thesis. :)

财政年度联邦所得税（十亿美元）

2001.....1145
2002.....1006
2003......926
2004......998
2005.....1206
2006.....1398
2007.....1534
2008.....1450

[Bencook2]

作为企业主，我有10便士来支付账单，员工和税金，以发展我的业务。

而且...可能会获得一点利润。

如果我今年要交3便士的税，明年要交4便士的话……'一位经济学家认为，扣除费用和税金后，我剩下的钱越多，我就可以投入更多的钱来发展我的业务（工作）或参与我们的消费经济（间接工作）。

这过度简化了吗？只是轻微。

There are of course other 事实ors at work. 的quotes posted by Brendan above without context are also over simplifications.

的"fact" is, that businesses are in business to stay in business. Owners/Managers have a fiduciary responsibility to insure this. 的more money left over after taxes, the more LIKELY these owners and managers are to invest-in/grow the business (jobs).

另一个极难预测和量化的因素是，即使没有盈余，也没有信心或订单&所有者/经理部分的可预见性世界上所有盈余（皇冠手机app下载网址）都不会说服他们进行投资/增长。它将把钱扔掉。 （这是我们自2000年以来或多或少的程度。格林斯潘的反面's "Exuberance.")

So, to look at the 衬套 Tax Cuts and or any tax 切 and suggest that based solely on the existence of the "cut"在X时段内"cuts"与经济增长没有因果关系过于简单化。

但是，从微观上看，企业而不是企业"economy"并询问皇冠手机app下载网址措施是否对这家企业有帮助...最可能一次又一次的回答是什么？但是，这种微观叙事并不过分简单。实际上，它是一种启发式的摇摇欲坠！

[JP]

看起来就像保罗·克鲁格曼（Paul Krugman）一样。

"But we’re talking about voodoo economics here, so perhaps it’s not surprising that belief 在里面 magical powers of tax 切s is a zombie doctrine: no matter how many times you kill it with 事实s, it just keeps coming back."

我喜欢克鲁格曼（Krugman）的单词选择，僵尸学说。我们需要将僵尸和绿色灯笼放在一起。

[Ken Amylon]

我希望布伦丹能以开放的心态阅读这些文章。显而易见，如果一个人相信证据和逻辑规则，就无法证明任何一个命题。因此，我们听到的是，保罗•克鲁格曼（Paul Krugman）之类的政治人物与政治家之间不断的思想争执不休。但是，我们绝对知道，随着"Bush"皇冠手机app下载网址（因此，我拒绝任何有关皇冠手机app下载网址的说法"caused"赤字支出。支出的绝对水平仅超过收入的增长）。
无论如何，我认为我们'重新问错问题。我想提出两个考虑：1）有什么证据表明政府支出会刺激经济？老实说，充其量，您只能说'出于与皇冠手机app下载网址相同的理由，不能以一种或另一种方式证明该提议。但是诚实的经济历史学生会承认，降低税率后收入会增加，而经济复苏不会'刺激性支出似乎加速了这一步。布伦丹，你怎么说？其他？
2）人们只是因遗产税而丧命（双关语）。人们认为这只是有益的事情"the rich"那些坐立不安的人。所以让's首先规定遗产中的钱已经征税或将在转移给继承人时征税（除非它像肯尼迪家族一样受到信托保护）'财富，对此批评几乎是合理的）。让's还规定，不动产的一部分由小型企业和家庭农场组成。但所有这些方面，我认为这是一个道德或公平问题。假设像大拉斯（Tim Russert'的父亲），一个人一生要做两个全职工作，以养家糊口。他的遗产是否应与仅从事一份工作的人的遗产相同的税额和相同的税率？为什么自由主义者如此坚决地接纳某人'从他的家人那里来之不易的财产？对我来说's very unseemly.
我的底线是推广一些成功的税收计划的挑战'•消除创造就业机会的动机。为什么我们在接受清晰的税收政策对经济影响的明确证据方面有如此大的麻烦？并且可以 '我们请停止让我们的客观性因比我们更努力，做得更好的人们的嫉妒而扭曲。