Mark & Juanita wrote in message . ..
On 1 Sep 2004 06:11:20 -0700, (Josh Rosenbluth) wrote:

Your analysis amounted to nothing more than noting single-year revenue
growth for a few selected years before the tax cut (9.67% in 1977,
-3.1% in 1980, 3.42% in 1981) and a few selected years after the tax
cut (6.37% in 1987, -6.06% in 1983, 5.59% in 1984). What meaning does
that have with regards to the debt?

A) A few selected years? I showed all years starting from 1975, could have
gone back farther, could have gone forward more, but the story would have
been the same.

I am not arguing with the years you showed in the chart. I am taking
issue with your subsequent analysis of those numbers because 1) you
only used pre-tax cut 1977, 1980, 1981 and post-tax cut 1983, 1984,
1987 and 2) you did nothing more than repeat the figures from the
selected years without explaining what/how conclusions can be drawn
from them.

I also showed *real* per year revenue growth based upon
inflation adjusted value of that year's revenue.

That's good. But, you still included payroll taxes whose rates went
up under Reagan. You need to limit your analysis to income tax
revenues.

Even in your case, you
show that revenue started growing.

If you wait long enough (6 years in Reagan's case), revenue will
eventually get back to pre-tax cut levels. However, debt has exploded
in the meantime. Moreover, if revenue in years 6+ would have been
bigger without the tax cut than with it, even the additional debt in
years 6+ would also be bigger without the tax cut than with it.

B) Why is it only income that should be considered for debt computations?
If *I* don't make as much money *I* don't SPEND as much money. Now, the
next argument you will raise is that Reagan broke the bank by spending
money we didn't have on defense in a huge indefensible defense build-up.
The fact is that if Reagan could have just increased spending on defense,
we would not have added to debt, or added minimally. The problem was that
in order to get his defense spending approved (something that he viewed as
paramount to the survival of this republic), he had to compromise and allow
entitlements to also be raised.

Firstly, spending and revenue must both be considered. The debt
explosion under Reagan was caused by both the military expansion and
tax cut.

Secondly, non-military spending, exlcusive of Social Security and
Medicare, decreased under Reagan. And, the Social Security and
Medicare surpluses (they are funded through payroll taxes) grew under
Reagan. Therefore, the debt explosion had nothing to do with
non-military spending.

Josh Rosenbluth