[dllthomas]

Unless your laws are dictating how much people work, individual behavior dictates "the Laffer curve" in the generalized sense most people mean it. If you tax zero, you get zero revenue. If you tax 100% you get... zero revenue because no one works if you take all of the earnings. Between the two we know we find positive values. The particular shape of the curve in a particular environment is an empirical question.

Where it is a political tool is where it was applied before doing that empirical work, and where it is presented with unrealistic shapes (including, notably, most of search results when I search for "Laffer curve"!)

[imtringued]

My laffer curve tells me tax the land and nothing else.

[po1nt]

Fair enough, georgism is one of the more logically sound solutions.

[butMyside]

No, human behavior enables things like the Laffer curve to be defined and held up like a shiny bauble by a politically motivated half-wit.

Laffer has never had and never will have anything to do with pre-existing human behavior itself.

He never defined any of the math objects he used. As far as I can see he’s not invented any net new value, he translated English economic babble into math. It’s elementary abstraction by today’s standards. Since most people could barely balance a checkbook in his day, he’s a genius for life.

It’s like taking a child’s drawing of a tree and acting like the child gave life to the tree.

It’s ridiculous to foist prestige on idiots wielding arithmetic. Look at the misogynistic, misandrist, classist, racist, culture our elders grew up in and chuck their prestige in the bin; they’re human like everyone else.

You want to put a number value on others? Here’s yours; 1 of 7 billion+.

Rich people are rich because everyone else worries if we tax them, everyone can’t magically become rich. They’re aren’t actually smarter, stronger, better; it’s just propaganda; aka today as data science.

[dllthomas]

If you refuse to refer to the underlying dynamic with the name the rest of us are using that's fine, just be clear about it or we'll all be arguing against positions the others aren't actually presenting.