The definition of supply-side economics according to page 556 of the Edwards textbook is " an economic theory advocated by President Reagan holding that too much income goes to taxes so that too little money is available for purchasing and that the solution is to cut taxes and return purchasing power to the consumers". I agree with supply-side economics because I believe that too much money is taken out of the American people's income which is exactly what this theory is saying. Since too much of the people's income goes to taxes, they have less money to stimulate the economy, which makes the economy very dependent on what the government is doing rather than what the people are doing.
I agree with the theory of Keynesian Economics. I side with this theory because it states that governmental spending and deficits can help the economy weather its normal ups and downs. In this theory, the government can stimulate the economy when it is lagging.
Like Eli, I agree more with supply-side economics. To supply-siders, big government soaks up too much of the GDP. By taxing too heavily, spending too freely,, and regulating too tightly, government actually curtails economic growth. By lowering tax rates, you could increased the motivation to work longer, increase savings and investments, and produce more. Economist Arthur Laffer proposed a curve suggesting that the more government taxed, the less people worked and thus the smaller the government's tax revenues. (Edwards, 556-557)
I agree with Blake and support Keynesian economics. Keynesian economics can lead to the stabilization of the banking industry. During the recent recession, banks and lending institutions were reluctant with loans. Small businesses were negatively affected and mortgages were hard to maintain or even get in the first place. If the government were to step in to regulate spending, lenders would be more confident. In times of recession, the country needs assistance from the federal government to help keep the economy on its feet.
The definition of supply-side economics according to page 556 of the Edwards textbook is " an economic theory advocated by President Reagan holding that too much income goes to taxes so that too little money is available for purchasing and that the solution is to cut taxes and return purchasing power to the consumers". I agree with supply-side economics because I believe that too much money is taken out of the American people's income which is exactly what this theory is saying. Since too much of the people's income goes to taxes, they have less money to stimulate the economy, which makes the economy very dependent on what the government is doing rather than what the people are doing.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the theory of Keynesian Economics. I side with this theory because it states that governmental spending and deficits can help the economy weather its normal ups and downs. In this theory, the government can stimulate the economy when it is lagging.
DeleteLike Eli, I agree more with supply-side economics. To supply-siders, big government soaks up too much of the GDP. By taxing too heavily, spending too freely,, and regulating too tightly, government actually curtails economic growth. By lowering tax rates, you could increased the motivation to work longer, increase savings and investments, and produce more. Economist Arthur Laffer proposed a curve suggesting that the more government taxed, the less people worked and thus the smaller the government's tax revenues. (Edwards, 556-557)
DeleteI agree with Blake and support Keynesian economics. Keynesian economics can lead to the stabilization of the banking industry. During the recent recession, banks and lending institutions were reluctant with loans. Small businesses were negatively affected and mortgages were hard to maintain or even get in the first place. If the government were to step in to regulate spending, lenders would be more confident. In times of recession, the country needs assistance from the federal government to help keep the economy on its feet.
Delete