The Minneapolis Star Tribune's editorial page is making my point for me.
In a post three weeks ago, I sorted the people who argue the question of economic growth into the following two camps:
Camp 1 says: “Growth is to some degree a function of tax rates. Within a reasonable, relevant range, lower rates boost economic growth, and higher rates stifle growth. Our long-run priority should be policies of growth-enhancement, currency stability, and prudent debt-burden management.”
Camp 2 says: “Growth just happens; it’s not a function of tax rates, it’s a function of the business cycle. It's an independent variable in our macroeconomic equations. Therefore, the quickest way to boost federal tax receipts is to increase tax rates—and it should be obvious that we need a quick boost in tax receipts.”
I do believe that the Minneapolis Star Tribune is firmly planted in Camp 2—and if they're like the Camp 2 folks I'm familiar with, they are extremely reluctant to hear or discuss evidence to the contrary ("...la la la, I can't hear you..."). Nonetheless, economic growth is overwhelmingly important in the debt-and-deficits discussions, as I've said time and again in this weblog.
As a result, I took the liberty of marking up the Star Tribune's editorial by adding some questions and comments to a screenshot of the page (...see yellow boxes and red marks). My questions are rhetorical, i.e., I expect no answer. And if I turn out to be wrong about that, it would be a pleasant surprise.
Here's my markup of the Star Tribune editorial. Click to enlarge:
