In response to:

America Nears El Tipping Pointo

wtmoore1 Wrote: Dec 06, 2012 1:40 PM
I love this economic "paradox" that is always cited by proponents on the right. Maybe one of the reasons that it seems so paradoxical is because its not necessarily true. Many variables impact whether revenue reaches estimated levels, and contrary to the simplicity with which conservatives attempt to gloss EVERYTHING, it's not as simple as "tax rate increase equals revenue decrease." But don't tell conservatives. That type of language is considered obscene in rural communities...
wiseone Wrote: Dec 06, 2012 2:06 PM
The only reason you think it's a paradox is because your simple mind is incapable of comprehending anything more complicated than a "zero sum game".

Revenues have risen DRAMATICALLY every time tax rates have been reduced, especially the top marginal rates for "the rich". It happened in the 60s, the 80s, and the 2000s.

Or maybe you can specifically identify all of the "variables" that have caused us to continue to receive more revenue during Obama's recession under the Bush tax rates than we received during the 'Clinton boom' under the higher Clinton tax rates. Maybe you can, but I seriously doubt it. It would require a lot more than stubborn denial, which is all you've provided so far.

I apologize to America's young people, whose dashed dreams and dim employment prospects I had laughed at, believing these to be a direct result of their voting for Obama.

On closer examination, it turns out that young voters, aged 18-29, overwhelmingly supported Romney. But only the white ones.

According to Pew Research, 54 percent of white voters under 30 voted for Romney and only 41 percent for Obama. That's the same percentage Reagan got from the entire white population in 1980. Even the Lena Dunham demographic -- white women under 30 -- slightly favored Romney.

Reagan got...