A Few Simple Snarky Rules to Make Life Better
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 306: ‘Fear Not' Old Testament – Part 2
The War on Warring
No Sanctuary in the Sanctuary
Chromosomes Matter — and Women’s Sports Prove It
The Economy Will Decide Congress — If Republicans Actually Talk About It
The Real United States of America
These Athletes Are Getting Paid to Shame Their Own Country at the Olympics
WaPo CEO Resigns Days After Laying Off 300 Employees
Georgia's Jon Ossoff Says Trump Administration Imitates Rhetoric of 'History's Worst Regim...
U.S. Thwarts $4 Million Weapons Plot Aimed at Toppling South Sudan Government
Minnesota Mom, Daughter, and Relative Allegedly Stole $325k from SNAP
Michigan AG: Detroit Man Stole 12 Identities to Collect Over $400,000 in Public...
Does Maxine Waters Really Think Trump Will Be Bothered by Her Latest Tantrum?
Fifth Circuit Rules That Some Illegal Aliens Can Be Detained Without Bond Until...
Tipsheet

Why "Soaking the Rich" Doesn't Work

In the Wall Street Journal, Alan Reynolds has a must-read: "Why 70% tax rates won't work."

In essence, the piece illustrates, chapter and verse, the history that reveals that more money actually flows to the Treasury when there are lower tax rates -- no doubt because of the growth and entrepreneurship spurred by people being allowed to keep more of what they themselves have made.
Advertisement

One would think that would be enough to convince Democrats that raising taxes on "the rich" isn't going to solve any of America's problems.  It proves that lower tax rates produce higher revenues (at least to a point of diminishing returns).  But don't expect these facts to change Democrats' minds about the desirability of raising taxes.  

That's because -- for a lot of them -- taxation isn't just about filling the government's coffers.  It's about collectivism and imposing the left-wing view of "equality," otherwise known as "social leveling." True believers iinclude the President, who once advocated maintaining a higher capital gains rate -- even if it resulted in less money to the Treasury -- "for purposes of fairness," as he put it.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement