Today the economy/business section of the Washington
Post has a
news story that, in parts, reads as if it could have been
written by Art Laffer:
In this new era of frugality, well-to-do shoppers have gone
into hiding and stowed away their splashy logos. But they may
hold the key to a consumer recovery.
Affluent shoppers are the most important segment of consumer
spending, which in turn drives the national economy. The top 20
percent of the nation’s households — with income of at least
$150,000 — account for 40 percent of all spending, according
to government data. That makes them a crucial spoke to any
turnaround.
Of course, at no point in the article does the author draw a
connection between spending among affluent Americans and tax
policy. But if Obama follows through on his promises, it’s this
very segment of the population that will see their taxes go up
substantially as the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of next
year. And if the House Democratic health care bill passes —
along with its additional income tax surcharges on the wealthy —
the top tax rate would hit over 57 percent in some states,
according
to the Tax Foundation. The analysis also found that the top
rate would be over 50 percent in 39 states, and no lower than
47.3 percent in any state.
Whether or not it’s fair, the reality is that the wealthy have
more flexibility to adjust their behavior in response to changes
in the tax code. If the key to the economic recovery, as the
Post acknowledges, is to encourage wealthy Americans to
spend more money, raising their taxes doesn’t exactly seem like
sound policy.
Bob| 9.9.09 @ 2:37PM
Phillip... I know you believe the economic knowledge of AmSpec's readership is weak, or else you wouldn't have dare tried to tie consumer spending to tax policy. Let me be clear, consumer expenditures have no relationship to tax levels. Here is a chart of consumer expenditure increases since 1947:
http://www.russell.com/Helping.....ng-PCE.asp
From the studies I remember, consumer spending is more related to the expectation of increased future income. In other words, when you think life will be better in the future, you tend to buy more now.
Furthermore, as this chart shows, the primary driver of consumer spending is on housing -- not discretionary purchases:
http://static.seekingalpha.com.....inance.jpg
Furthermore, even Laffer has never been able to prove his "supply side" theory works on a macro basis. I've shown the macro charts ad nauseum that proves that tax cuts are NOT stimulative. And no one has provided the normalized data to prove otherwise (because they can't).
The way you increase consumer spending is to improve consumer sentiment (which is why economists look at that measure). If people expect growth in their portfolios, they will spend.
I would suggest you look at the real data before you make your points to see if your statements are remotely true.
Tim| 9.9.09 @ 3:08PM
Yeah, "Phil" how dare you?
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral
Bob is the very model of a modern Major-General
BFK| 9.9.09 @ 3:19PM
I thought the top 5% had incomes of $160,000 or more?