tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post114291172504934302..comments2023-05-24T20:11:03.099+10:00Comments on MergeRight: How costly are tax cuts?#12 TBONEhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03441033540778254742noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post-1143064272036432922006-03-23T08:51:00.000+11:002006-03-23T08:51:00.000+11:00Your blog is so coool. Like you guys me and my gir...Your blog is so coool. Like you guys me and my girlfriends hang out all the time talking about ways to remove the dead hand of government from our lives. We think you guys are just so hot. Any chance of putting us some pics of yourselves?<BR/><BR/>love<BR/><BR/>Alyeesha xxooxoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post-1142938415848752402006-03-21T21:53:00.000+11:002006-03-21T21:53:00.000+11:00My previous comment should say 'tax decrease'. Dam...My previous comment should say 'tax decrease'. Damn, no editing!Matt Canavanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08706143904307451129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post-1142938296851338552006-03-21T21:51:00.000+11:002006-03-21T21:51:00.000+11:00My point is that you can't use tax/gdp to calculat...My point is that you can't use tax/gdp to calculate whether a tax increase has paid for itself. You need the absolute tax figures. But sure the higher the ratio is, the more likely a tax cut will raise revenue. <BR/><BR/>I agree with both your latter two points. Previously it has been burden sharing, and I'm also not that exicted about the current review (as I think I said in the post). I am Matt Canavanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08706143904307451129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post-1142935188158400522006-03-21T20:59:00.000+11:002006-03-21T20:59:00.000+11:00Sure its relevant- consider the effect of reducing...Sure its relevant- consider the effect of reducing Tax/GDP if it were 100%. But that wasn't my point. <BR/><BR/>My point was, that the last three sets of tax cuts were just burden sharing. This tax review is about raising more tax $ from a larger pie. I'm not that excited.<BR/><BR/>If you want a sure fire way to increase the efficiency of the tax system- easy raise less taxes. Walk first, chew #12 TBONEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03441033540778254742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post-1142931393719179812006-03-21T19:56:00.000+11:002006-03-21T19:56:00.000+11:00The income tax increase is in real, absolute terms...The income tax increase is in real, absolute terms. Agree with you that the Libs are happy to keep tax as a ratio of GDP constant. (Even the cuts to company tax were sold as revenue neutral). However, tax/gdp is not all that relevant when you are trying to see if tax cuts increase GDP. <BR/><BR/>I also agree that expenditure cutting is needed too. But surely we can walk and chew gum at the same Matt Canavanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08706143904307451129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18980502.post-1142920281299714692006-03-21T16:51:00.000+11:002006-03-21T16:51:00.000+11:00(Welcome back to the blogosphere)This statement: "...(Welcome back to the blogosphere)<BR/><BR/>This statement: "income tax revenue has increased by 25 per cent despite three income tax cut" is in absolute terms yes? <BR/><BR/>Its a moot point (that I'm making), but the feds are keeping taxes constant as a per cent of income, just spreading who pays. And thats been point of the last three "cuts." (See the table at the end of http://vibewire.net/2/#12 TBONEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03441033540778254742noreply@blogger.com