tennessee laffs last

Byline: | Category: Uncategorized | Posted at: Monday, 14 August 2006

If you were an experienced economist who was looking to escape California’s high taxes and stagnant economy, where would you relocate?

Well, if your name was Arthur Laffer (yes, that Art Laffer) you would move to Tennessee.

There are nine states in the U.S. with zero income tax. Tennessee happens to be one of them. I think that is a critical feature of any business being run. Why would you go to a state that has an income tax that’s ruining its population? This state has done a beautiful job,” he said.

There’s more here.

You can bet that an economist of Mr. Laffer’s stature analyzed every facet before deciding to move to Middle Tennessee.  His example is why we must keep there from being a state income tax in Tennessee so that we can continue to be a beacon to the best and brightest from around the world.

Share this post:

4 Responses to “tennessee laffs last”

  1. Sean Braisted Says:

    Hey, maybe Bryson can get him on as a campaign advisor to show Tennessee how to go from Budget Surplusses to Budget deficits…his theory did such wonders with the Federal Budget deficit, maybe he can do the same here.

  2. bob Says:

    Actually, Sean, Mr. Laffer’s theories worked flawlessly. By lowering marginal tax rates from as high as nearly 90% to less than 50%, federal tax revenues soared in the 80s. Unfortunately, the higher tax revenues only encouraged even faster government spending.

    The lesson for Tennessee, therefore, is to not confuse a government spending problem with a revenue problem.

  3. Donna Locke Says:

    Somehow I doubt those are the only reasons people are fleeing California, but it’s all related.

  4. Bill Hobbs Says:

    The tax cuts worked … but put conservatives in a quandry. After all, if taxes are lowered and the economy booms, revenue rises rather than falls, allowing for government to grow spending more rapidly and of course expand GOVERNMENT.

    Reaganomics cut taxes, which was good, but by doing so actually gave the government leviathan more money to spend.

    The solution then isn’t just lower taxes, but some sort of spending-control provision in the constitution which limits the annual growth of spending and forces a rebate to taxpayers of surplus revenue, or at least a reserving of surplus revenue for a future economic slump-induced revenue decline.

    Returning surplus tax revenue to the taxpayers would, of course, have the same impact as a tax cut and fuel even greater economic growth. Leading to more revenue. And bigger surpluses.

    It’s not a perpetual money machine – the Laffer Curve describes an optimal tax rate, below which revenues fall and above which revenues also fall.