Economistas de água doce

Pedro Lains diz que fez um modelo em excel que pouparia 250 mil empregos. Buahahahahah… Como é que convidam um pateta destes para falar na televisão?

GostarGostar

Não vi o programa mas registo a frase: “os do mainstream dividem-se em água doce e água salgada.
“
E os que não são do mainstream?
São de aquário?

GostarGostar

.
Por exemplo sobre certos Economistas, e não só
.
O MITO DA CURVA DE LAFFER:
.
An income tax cut helps everyone; not only the taxpayer but also the government will benefit, since tax revenues will rise when the rate is cut.
.
This is the so-called “Laffer curve,” set forth by California economist Arthur Laffer. It was advanced as a means of allowing politicians to square the circle; to come out for tax cuts, keeping spending at the current level, and balance the budget all at the same time.
.
In that way, the public would enjoy its tax cut, be happy at the balanced budget, and still receive the same level of subsidies from the government.
.
It is true that if tax rates are 99%, and they are cut to 95%, tax revenue will go up. But there is no reason to assume such simple connections at any other time.
.
By example, this relationship works much better for a local excise tax than for a national income tax. A few years ago, the government of the State of Columbia decided to procure some revenue by sharply raising the gasoline tax. But, then, drivers could simply nip over the border to Staes of Virginia or Maryland and fill up at a much cheaper price. D.C. gasoline tax revenues fell, and much to the chagrin and confusion of D.C. bureaucrats, they had to repeal the tax.
.
But this is not likely to happen with the income tax. People are not going to stop working or leave the country because of a relatively small tax hike, or do the reverse because of a tax cut.
.
There are some other problems with the Laffer curve. The amount of time it is supposed to take for the Laffer effect to work is never specified.
.
But still more important: Laffer assumes that what all of us want is to maximize tax revenue to the government.
.
If – a big IF – we are really at the upper half of the Laffer Curve, we should then all want to set tax rates at that “optimum” point. But why?
.
Why should it be the objective of every one of us to maximize government revenue?
.
To push to the maximum, in short, the share of private product that gets siphoned off to the activities of government?
.
It should think we would be more interested in minimizing government revenue by pushing tax rates far, far below whatever the Laffer Optimum might happen to be.
.

GostarGostar

Já só reservo crédito, entre economistas, para João Ferreira do Amaral.

Os restantes parecem gagos quando lhe falha o ponto.

GostarGostar

LOL!!!

«Passos abdica da taxa sobre pensões, confirma UGT (Económico)

O secretário geral da UGT, Carlos Silva, afirmou hoje que o Governo vai abdicar da taxa sobre reformados e pensionistas, uma indicação dada pelo primeiro-ministro na reunião mantida hoje com a central sindical.»

GostarGostar