[Garry Richardson]

WSJ = Teh Newsmax

[exsmoker]

R^2 = 0.000000000002!

[Doncarlito]

Originally posted by Ramo

[Xzmwskxn]

I can't honestly say I understand that at all. How does that curve show any relation to anything?

The basic premise I wouldn't necessarily disagree with - lower tax rate with fewer loopholes certainly could lead to higher tax income. However I think the 'fewer loopholes' is a difficult thing to quantify and even harder to stick to...

Norway is an outlier largely because of the oil taxes, I presume? They also have huge personal income taxes, iirc, so that would bias this (if Tax income as % of GDP includes personal income tax, which it well may).

[heinz_1966]

LS that's fantastic

[Zenthachall]

Wow, just wow.

[SOgLak]

I don't know what's scarrier:

that WSJ is dumb enough to print that

or

that we smart enough to realize how lame that is

[77chawzence]

Originally posted by LordShiva
http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/hall.html That was the best laugh as I've had in quite a while.

[Mjyzpzph]

Just look at Castro! They must have a good health care system to keep that crone alive this long!

[CDCL7WKJ]

"Figures don't lie, but liars figure." Select your data carefully enough, and you, too, can prove that Norway has a great tax system or Cuba has a great health care system. Depends on the point you are trying to prove, not what the data actually reveals. WSJ readers are mostly corporate types who would love to see lower corporate taxes. Thus, a chart proving you get more from less. Yeah, right. This can't entirely be attributed to intellectual dishonesty.

[9TWSg835]

Originally posted by Master Zen
The WSJ writes some of the stupidest, most biased op-eds. I've ever read about my country. I sometimes wonder if the people that write about Mexico have actually been here. If Murdoch buys it the BS is the op-eds will spread and infest the rest of the paper.

[DrunkMans]

Originally posted by jkp1187


Yup. They sure cleared up AIDS in Cuba -- all they had to do was throw anyone with the disease in prison. Good job! Yeah, good job

[kubekniekubek]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
"Figures don't lie, but liars figure." Select your data carefully enough, and you, too, can prove that Norway has a great tax system or Cuba has a great health care system. Depends on the point you are trying to prove, not what the data actually reveals. WSJ readers are mostly corporate types who would love to see lower corporate taxes. Thus, a chart proving you get more from less. Yeah, right. Again... the ultimate proposition [in some nations lowering tax rates but eliminating loopholes] may not be flawed. I just don't see how that graph helps

It will help in the following cases:

1. Where (loopholes eliminated) > (tax rate decrease).
Simple math.

2. Where businesses choose to come to the nation because of the tax decrease, where before they were not aware of the loopholes and/or not interested in playing the games to get them.

As above, I doubt this is the case across the board, or even in a large number of nations, but I don't doubt that in a meaningful percentage (10%-30%) of nations this might be the case. The US especially [where loopholes are abundant, both corporate and private].

[geaveheadeNox]

Originally posted by snoopy369


Again... the ultimate proposition [in some nations lowering tax rates but eliminating loopholes] may not be flawed. I just don't see how that graph helps

It will help in the following cases:

1. Where (loopholes eliminated) > (tax rate decrease).
Simple math.

2. Where businesses choose to come to the nation because of the tax decrease, where before they were not aware of the loopholes and/or not interested in playing the games to get them.

As above, I doubt this is the case across the board, or even in a large number of nations, but I don't doubt that in a meaningful percentage (10%-30%) of nations this might be the case. The US especially [where loopholes are abundant, both corporate and private]. Firms could care less about revenue, what they are interested is maintaining financial equilibrium. When there's a change in tax law, firms have to adjust one way or another and the bottom line is whether the have to pay more taxes. This can happen (I believe this is what you are referring to by your first point) even by dropping tax rates but closing loopholes (you'd be surprised how taxes can soar just by closing major loopholes even when rates fall).

Ultimately the corollary for a tax reform to work is to have a competitive economy. Most people fail to consider this. By having an economy kidnapped by monopolies, companies will simply adjust to tax reforms by layoffs and with little potential for new companies to enter the market. That said, a poorly designed tax reform can ruin industries too.

First rule of economics is: there's never a panacea.

[JANALA]

Originally posted by Master Zen
The WSJ writes some of the stupidest, most biased op-eds. I've ever read about my country. I sometimes wonder if the people that write about Mexico have actually been here.
Ahhh, so every economist in Mexico agrees with you. And everything is working so well, too!

[mitiaycatq]

The editorials are opinions expressed by the staff, the page opposite are opinion pieces solicited from outside sources.

You implied that anyone from (or at least having visited) Mexico would share your opinion... and as you are an economist and the topic is WSJ op-ed on economics I inferred that you were talking economics.

So what did you mean when you implied that all Mexicans or people who study Mexico agree with you?

[MaickiP]

Originally posted by Straybow
You implied that anyone from (or at least having visited) Mexico would share your opinion... and as you are an economist and the topic is WSJ op-ed on economics I inferred that you were talking economics.

I implied nothing. The way WSJ op-eds are written manifest a profound ignorance of the actual socio-economic situation in Mexico independently of their "opinion" on whatever topic is at hand. A local economist doesn't also necessarily have to understand or interpret it the way I do so all local economists don't also have to necessarily agree with me either.

Keep entertaining me though

[BJEugene]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
MZ sighting. That seems to be rarer than Haley's comet these days