
Gary Becker and Kevin Murphy on inequality and growth in living standards
23 Jul 2015 Leave a comment

Top marginal income tax rate throughout the 20th century
29 Jun 2015 Leave a comment
in economic history, entrepreneurship, income redistribution, politics - USA, Public Choice, public economics, rentseeking Tags: Eurosclerosis, taxation and entrepreneurship, taxation and investment, taxation and the labour supply, top 1%
Piketty presents the changes in the top marginal income tax rate throughout the 20th century… #GCLIS http://t.co/sFpV0ypC5C—
LIS (@lisdata) April 16, 2014
Who is where on the Laffer curve?
20 Jun 2015 Leave a comment
in economic growth, fiscal policy, human capital, labour economics, labour supply, macroeconomics, politics - USA, public economics Tags: endogenous growth theory, EU, Eurosclerosis, laffer curve, optimal tax theory, taxation and entrepreneurship, taxation and investment, taxation and the labour supply
@asymmetricinfo paper:"How Far Are We From The Slippery Slope? The Laffer Curve Revisited" bit.ly/1HMhmqu http://t.co/D9IffNhd92—
Old Whig (@aClassicLiberal) April 20, 2015
The role of new taxes in the Great Recession
24 Apr 2015 Leave a comment
in economic growth, fiscal policy, great recession, labour economics, labour supply, macroeconomics, politics - USA Tags: great recession, obama, Obamacare, taxation and entrepreneurship, taxation and investment, taxation and labour supply


.
Stephen Williamson on Marginal Taxation
03 Aug 2014 Leave a comment
in applied welfare economics, fiscal policy, income redistribution, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, Public Choice Tags: envy, Stephen Williamson, taxation and entrepreneurship, taxation and human capital, taxation and investment, taxation and labour supply, top 1%
He says a lot. I’ll try to address piece by piece.
Next, some people have shown interest in this paper by Diamond and Saez. A key result that seemed to get these people excited is the calculation of a top optimal marginal tax rate (including all taxes) of 73%, relative to the current rate of 42.5%. There are two key assumptions that Diamond and Saez make to come up with the 73% optimal rate. First, we should not care about the welfare (at the margin) of the rich people. This argument is based solely on the notion that marginal utility of income is low for the top income-earners. Second, Diamond and Saez use a “behavioral elasticity” of tax revenue with respect to the tax rate of 0.25. To see how this matters, if you use their formula and an elasticity of one, you get an optimal top tax rate…
View original post 1,215 more words
Recent Comments