(08-09-2018, 02:15 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(08-09-2018, 01:41 PM)jj82284 Wrote: Basic empirical predictions are generally pretty straight forward.  If tax revenue is down then u get to say I told u so.  

With projected growth North of 3% then that means were looking at about 1/2 a trillion dollars more in gdp.  That projects to close to 90 billion more in federal tax revenue, so I'm not really all that concerned.

Math is not your strong suit.
Yes, if the economy grows, you can take the fraction of growth, multiply it by rough, new, gross tax rate, and say the product is new revenue for the government.
However
Gross tax rates changed.
You also have to multiply the original GDP by the change in gross tax rate.
That's lost revenue to the government.
In all likelihood, the magnitude of the postive will be smaller than the magnitude of the negative. Probably adds up to an annual revenue loss of about $60 billion, if your growth number of 3% holds.

The Government produces NOTHING so they have to tax the working stiffs for their revenue. How can you say it's a loss for the government under the old tax rate when the growth was not there? If it wasn't for the tax cuts, growth would not be there in the 1st place and then it would have been a net loss because less people working means less revenue. Tax cuts work every time they're tried, Kennedy proved that, Reagan Proved that, and now Trump is proving that.

---