There are a few irrefutable laws of basic economics that are understood by practically everyone. When the price of a good rises, people will buy less of it. This is common knowledge to anyone who has bought anything ever. There is also the law of unintended consequences which states that actions, laws, and policies often have secondary effects that differ from the original actions intentions. We have seen this inevitably played out in most laws passed by Congress. Both of these ideas have been around for thousands of years and the father of economics, Adam Smith, articulated them himself...
Gentle Readers, On the contrary: Ms. Pavlich is correct. If taxing sugary foods reduces the output and consumption of sugary foods, then logically, taxing capital, labor and other production inputs will reduce production and consumption in the economy generally. Her point here is that increasing marginal tax rates can have unforseen adverse economic impacts. She then points out that if liberals can understand how increasing taxes reduce consuption of their disfavored products, they should understand how that affects other economic actions. She is correct. Sincerely, John Lepant Brighton CO
- Question for the State Department after Sotloff’s murder: Are we at war with ISIS yet? Allahpundit 18 mins ago
- Kerry: Let’s put together a coalition of the willing to defeat ISIS Ed Morrissey 58 mins ago
- Tuesday TEMS: Andrew Malcolm, Stephen Hayes Ed Morrissey 1 hour ago
- Latest ISIS beheading of an American exposes moral bankruptcy of our betters Noah Rothman 1 hour ago
- Video: Parents of fallen SEAL demand Obama resignation Ed Morrissey 2 hours ago
- Breaking: ISIS releases new video of beheading another American journalist Ed Morrissey 2 hours ago