ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax


I am not sure GDP is the relevant denominator because it has a significant government spending component and it doesn't seem like that should be used to support further government debt incurrence; isn't that sort of Ponzi-ish? Further, why is not the export / import balance relevant to the amount of debt a population can upport? Further, you would want to account for the amount of private sector indebtedness and you would want to think about what the asset side of the government balance sheet looked like. It seems like there is also a dynamic aspect to the relation between changes in debt repayment and any measure of economic output that the simple ratio does not capture.
I think one of the reasons that many policy makers believe higher tax rates produce significantly higher tax revenues is one of bias. In other words, they have specific assumptions about the J curve that I think are wrong. Don't take this the wrong way, but I think most folks in academia have a somewhat distorted view of taxpayer incentives, and especially high income tax payers. Specifically I think most adademics assume that the incentives and stress levels of very high income earners are similar to their own incentives and stress levels. In reality, I think high income tax payers propensity to work (and thus earn taxable income) is much more sensitive than those in adademia. This is because their jobs are more stressful and their career paths much more risky. High income earners are more likely to "take a vacation" if the risks and stresses associated with making lots of taxable income don't appear worth the reward.
Case in point....I worked on Wall Street during the 1990s. Gave up my life in sunny California to move to New York and work 80 hours per week. There is no way I would have made that trade in a significantly higher marginal tax rate world.
'Countries that already collect a sizeable fraction of GDP as tax revenue have less room to raise taxes than do countries like the US that tax a much smaller fraction.'
This assumes that countries don't usually tax the maximum politically acceptable amount.