▲ 1415 ▼ TIL About the Smoot-Hawley Act, Which was the 20% Across the Board Tariff That Deepened the Great Depression and Resulted in the Largest Senate Seat Loss in History (en.wikipedia.org) submitted 1 year ago by realitista@lemm.ee to c/til@lemmy.world 205 comments fedilink hide all child comments cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5566633 This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot. The original was posted on /r/todayilearned by /u/MechCADdie on 2025-04-04 08:19:11+00:00.
[–] d00phy@lemmy.world 113 points 1 year ago (3 children) Someone has either never seen “Ferris Buller’s Day Off,” can’t remember it very well, or didn’t pay attention. This was covered in class! permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 95 points 1 year ago (2 children) In 1930, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, in an effort to alleviate the effects of the... Anyone? Anyone?... the Great Depression, passed the... Anyone? Anyone? The tariff bill? The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act? Which, anyone? Raised or lowered?... raised tariffs, in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government. Did it work? Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression. Today we have a similar debate over this. Anyone know what this is? Class? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone seen this before? The Laffer Curve. Anyone know what this says? It says that at this point on the revenue curve, you will get exactly the same amount of revenue as at this point. This is very controversial. Does anyone know what Vice President Bush called this in 1980? Anyone? Something-d-o-o economics. Voodoo economics. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 51 points 1 year ago (2 children) I watched this movie 3-4 times and even when reading this, I'm still spaced out. Ben Stein just has a voice that makes me tune him out. Such a great voice for comedy. Shame he's anti-abortion, pretty racist, pro-Regan and Trump, weirdly against evolution... So many awful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] echodot@feddit.uk 34 points 1 year ago (2 children) weirdly against evolution You can see his point. Look where it got us, we should have stayed in the sea. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago Or we should've listened to what native americans were trying to tell us for centuries. permalink fedilink source parent [–] logi@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Yeah, can we vote for some intelligent design please. The old regime isn't working out. permalink fedilink source parent [–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago What's interesting is that this boring speech isn't just an actor reading something boring. Stein is a second-generation economist. He has a BA in economics from Columbia University. His father had a PhD in economics and chaired the Council of Economic Advisors under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. His father was apparently well respected by both parties, but the son has gone full MAGA, which is unfortunate. permalink fedilink source parent [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or we could just fund the IRS since it’s a profit center. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven to be true? that is news to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven likely true means not proven true. Way to many factors. I personally thing the theory has a sorta merit but is very limited and vague (in the sense of there is no identification of where the exact sweet spot of taxation levels are). For example the punitive measures for not paying taxes at very high levels need to be very severe to curtail such behavior. So five figure owning person or mom and pop shop you give a slap on the wrist. Maybe 10% of owed added. Wealthiest individuals and companies get knocked completely out of their level so like 500% of what was owed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) So the cut that went into effect in '83 was passed in '81, just before a recession hit. So the US seeing an increase in revenue compared to the few years before that where unemployment was up over 8% and gdp dropping, is really more about the economy recovering than tax policy changes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) Laffer curve in political practice is BS. It is proven that you raise 0 revenue at 100% tax rate because no one is actually paid to work, then. The political distortion is "therefore, always lower taxes for more revenue". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago nor does it justify any cut after 1983. That was my point on how it is misused. permalink fedilink source parent [–] higgsboson@dubvee.org 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) Planet Money interviewed the professor who wrote the book from which Ben Stein is reading in that scene. It is an older episode they re-air periodically. I think this one: https://www.npr.org/2024/12/11/1218506684/worst-tariffs-ever-update permalink fedilink source parent [–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago I know it from the Newsroom permalink fedilink source parent
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 95 points 1 year ago (2 children) In 1930, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, in an effort to alleviate the effects of the... Anyone? Anyone?... the Great Depression, passed the... Anyone? Anyone? The tariff bill? The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act? Which, anyone? Raised or lowered?... raised tariffs, in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government. Did it work? Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression. Today we have a similar debate over this. Anyone know what this is? Class? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone seen this before? The Laffer Curve. Anyone know what this says? It says that at this point on the revenue curve, you will get exactly the same amount of revenue as at this point. This is very controversial. Does anyone know what Vice President Bush called this in 1980? Anyone? Something-d-o-o economics. Voodoo economics. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 51 points 1 year ago (2 children) I watched this movie 3-4 times and even when reading this, I'm still spaced out. Ben Stein just has a voice that makes me tune him out. Such a great voice for comedy. Shame he's anti-abortion, pretty racist, pro-Regan and Trump, weirdly against evolution... So many awful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] echodot@feddit.uk 34 points 1 year ago (2 children) weirdly against evolution You can see his point. Look where it got us, we should have stayed in the sea. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago Or we should've listened to what native americans were trying to tell us for centuries. permalink fedilink source parent [–] logi@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Yeah, can we vote for some intelligent design please. The old regime isn't working out. permalink fedilink source parent [–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago What's interesting is that this boring speech isn't just an actor reading something boring. Stein is a second-generation economist. He has a BA in economics from Columbia University. His father had a PhD in economics and chaired the Council of Economic Advisors under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. His father was apparently well respected by both parties, but the son has gone full MAGA, which is unfortunate. permalink fedilink source parent [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or we could just fund the IRS since it’s a profit center. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven to be true? that is news to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven likely true means not proven true. Way to many factors. I personally thing the theory has a sorta merit but is very limited and vague (in the sense of there is no identification of where the exact sweet spot of taxation levels are). For example the punitive measures for not paying taxes at very high levels need to be very severe to curtail such behavior. So five figure owning person or mom and pop shop you give a slap on the wrist. Maybe 10% of owed added. Wealthiest individuals and companies get knocked completely out of their level so like 500% of what was owed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) So the cut that went into effect in '83 was passed in '81, just before a recession hit. So the US seeing an increase in revenue compared to the few years before that where unemployment was up over 8% and gdp dropping, is really more about the economy recovering than tax policy changes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) Laffer curve in political practice is BS. It is proven that you raise 0 revenue at 100% tax rate because no one is actually paid to work, then. The political distortion is "therefore, always lower taxes for more revenue". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago nor does it justify any cut after 1983. That was my point on how it is misused. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 51 points 1 year ago (2 children) I watched this movie 3-4 times and even when reading this, I'm still spaced out. Ben Stein just has a voice that makes me tune him out. Such a great voice for comedy. Shame he's anti-abortion, pretty racist, pro-Regan and Trump, weirdly against evolution... So many awful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] echodot@feddit.uk 34 points 1 year ago (2 children) weirdly against evolution You can see his point. Look where it got us, we should have stayed in the sea. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago Or we should've listened to what native americans were trying to tell us for centuries. permalink fedilink source parent [–] logi@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Yeah, can we vote for some intelligent design please. The old regime isn't working out. permalink fedilink source parent [–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago What's interesting is that this boring speech isn't just an actor reading something boring. Stein is a second-generation economist. He has a BA in economics from Columbia University. His father had a PhD in economics and chaired the Council of Economic Advisors under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. His father was apparently well respected by both parties, but the son has gone full MAGA, which is unfortunate. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 34 points 1 year ago (2 children) weirdly against evolution You can see his point. Look where it got us, we should have stayed in the sea. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago Or we should've listened to what native americans were trying to tell us for centuries. permalink fedilink source parent [–] logi@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Yeah, can we vote for some intelligent design please. The old regime isn't working out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago Or we should've listened to what native americans were trying to tell us for centuries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] logi@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Yeah, can we vote for some intelligent design please. The old regime isn't working out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago What's interesting is that this boring speech isn't just an actor reading something boring. Stein is a second-generation economist. He has a BA in economics from Columbia University. His father had a PhD in economics and chaired the Council of Economic Advisors under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. His father was apparently well respected by both parties, but the son has gone full MAGA, which is unfortunate. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or we could just fund the IRS since it’s a profit center. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven to be true? that is news to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven likely true means not proven true. Way to many factors. I personally thing the theory has a sorta merit but is very limited and vague (in the sense of there is no identification of where the exact sweet spot of taxation levels are). For example the punitive measures for not paying taxes at very high levels need to be very severe to curtail such behavior. So five figure owning person or mom and pop shop you give a slap on the wrist. Maybe 10% of owed added. Wealthiest individuals and companies get knocked completely out of their level so like 500% of what was owed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) So the cut that went into effect in '83 was passed in '81, just before a recession hit. So the US seeing an increase in revenue compared to the few years before that where unemployment was up over 8% and gdp dropping, is really more about the economy recovering than tax policy changes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) Laffer curve in political practice is BS. It is proven that you raise 0 revenue at 100% tax rate because no one is actually paid to work, then. The political distortion is "therefore, always lower taxes for more revenue". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago nor does it justify any cut after 1983. That was my point on how it is misused. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) Or we could just fund the IRS since it’s a profit center. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven to be true? that is news to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven likely true means not proven true. Way to many factors. I personally thing the theory has a sorta merit but is very limited and vague (in the sense of there is no identification of where the exact sweet spot of taxation levels are). For example the punitive measures for not paying taxes at very high levels need to be very severe to curtail such behavior. So five figure owning person or mom and pop shop you give a slap on the wrist. Maybe 10% of owed added. Wealthiest individuals and companies get knocked completely out of their level so like 500% of what was owed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) So the cut that went into effect in '83 was passed in '81, just before a recession hit. So the US seeing an increase in revenue compared to the few years before that where unemployment was up over 8% and gdp dropping, is really more about the economy recovering than tax policy changes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven likely true means not proven true. Way to many factors. I personally thing the theory has a sorta merit but is very limited and vague (in the sense of there is no identification of where the exact sweet spot of taxation levels are). For example the punitive measures for not paying taxes at very high levels need to be very severe to curtail such behavior. So five figure owning person or mom and pop shop you give a slap on the wrist. Maybe 10% of owed added. Wealthiest individuals and companies get knocked completely out of their level so like 500% of what was owed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) So the cut that went into effect in '83 was passed in '81, just before a recession hit. So the US seeing an increase in revenue compared to the few years before that where unemployment was up over 8% and gdp dropping, is really more about the economy recovering than tax policy changes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) proven likely true means not proven true. Way to many factors. I personally thing the theory has a sorta merit but is very limited and vague (in the sense of there is no identification of where the exact sweet spot of taxation levels are). For example the punitive measures for not paying taxes at very high levels need to be very severe to curtail such behavior. So five figure owning person or mom and pop shop you give a slap on the wrist. Maybe 10% of owed added. Wealthiest individuals and companies get knocked completely out of their level so like 500% of what was owed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) I would not even say it worked once in 83. Lower rates are one possible reason but like anything with the economy there are plenty of factors including cyclical changes that could explain it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) I mean that sounds more like a tax haven situation. Honestly to stop that I think countries should require companies meet their tax rate globally where they can deduct what they pay elsewhere. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) See. to me. we became the tax haven. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 child) So the cut that went into effect in '83 was passed in '81, just before a recession hit. So the US seeing an increase in revenue compared to the few years before that where unemployment was up over 8% and gdp dropping, is really more about the economy recovering than tax policy changes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) Laffer curve in political practice is BS. It is proven that you raise 0 revenue at 100% tax rate because no one is actually paid to work, then. The political distortion is "therefore, always lower taxes for more revenue". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago nor does it justify any cut after 1983. That was my point on how it is misused. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago nor does it justify any cut after 1983. That was my point on how it is misused. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago nor does it justify any cut after 1983. That was my point on how it is misused. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] higgsboson@dubvee.org 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) Planet Money interviewed the professor who wrote the book from which Ben Stein is reading in that scene. It is an older episode they re-air periodically. I think this one: https://www.npr.org/2024/12/11/1218506684/worst-tariffs-ever-update permalink fedilink source parent
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago I know it from the Newsroom permalink fedilink source parent