The government letting people and corporations keep more of what they earn shouldn't have to "pay for itself" because it's not the government's money to begin with.
True, we merely entrust the money to government, to spend on those necessary things which we would not obtain with greater efficiency ourselves. But those kinds of things do exist, so what we're debating should not be "no taxes at all", but instead debating what's legit spending and what isn't. When we know that, we know what legitimate taxes are. When we know what the legitimate taxes are, we know what money could rightfully be called, at least in a practical sense, the government's money.
I have never heard that distinction made, so I can't say that it does or doesn't exist. I imagine that if Greenspan could, he would have made an if-then qualified response. On the face of it, there appears to be no legitimate source suggesting any tax cuts pay for themselves. That's not to say that tax cuts can't or don't serve a purpose. They may increase output and consumption in appropriate circumstances, but that does not necessarily mean they will pay for themselves. (In)elasticity and all that. And so, while I suppose it's possible to conjure up a strained and hypothetical scenario where there tax cuts would have a favorable outcome on revenue, for all practical intents and purposes, that's not how the relationship appears to work. This according to people with access to better information and analysis than you and I have (and even jem).
You're now taking the argument sideways. It was jem who first asserted in this thread that revenues go up when taxes go down, and the discussion went from there. Now that he has no leg to stand on, since tax cuts don't even pay for themselves let alone increase revenue, you come to the rescue with a heroic non sequitur.
You'll probably like this: http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...x_cuts_ever_increase_government_revenues.html And this: http://www.epi.org/blog/mitch-daniels-deficit-peacock/
You two make a great couple... neither of you pays a dime in federal income tax in the United States, yet you both "think" you know what's best for those of us who do with YOUR non sequitur that the peoples' money is the government's. Which of you is the husband and which is the wife?
=========== Thanks; & the Bible standard is tithe[10%] plus love offerings. So at least he gave more than the gov of TX.God bless all of the capitalists