For some context: The Laffer curve was used by the GOP in the 1980s to intellectually legitimize[1] the policy of cutting taxes.[2] They said cutting tax rates

For some context: The Laffer curve was used by the GOP in the 1980s to intellectually legitimize[1] the policy of cutting taxes.[2] They said cutting tax rates on the wealthy would increase tax revenue (!) and the benefits to the wealthy would "trickle down" to everyone else through increased investment, etc. The results were simply that the wealthy had more money. The federal government developed a massive deficit and while the economy has grown since the 1980s almost all the resulting wealth has been acquired by the wealthiest; incomes of 'everyone else' have stagnated since then. IIRC, the Laffer curve was never taken seriously by any but partisan economists, and was widely discredited. ---- [1] You'll note that all parties love to create 'research' that provide intellectual ballast to their predetermined policies. They know what sells to the intellectual crowd, who see something that looks like legtimate research but certainly don't have the time to study the issue themselves. The parties have pet think tanks that produce studies for them; for example, the Heritage Foundation is a prominent example for the GOP. [2] As evidence for note #1: Consider whether the GOP ever would consider a higher rate the appropriate level for taxation. Of course not. The results of the research are predetermined by the desired policy. The Democrats do it too, but I don't think they take it to the extremes of the GOP: Climate change denial, the evidence for the Iraq War, not regulatng the housing market before the crash, fighting finacial regulation after the crash, etc. (People want to be 'even-handed' and say it's balanced, the same on both sides, but really it would be a surprise if any situation worked out that way. I'm not partisan, I support any route to more pragmatic and less crazy policies.)