Sounds like what was said about quantum mechanics about 60 years ago.
Yes. Quantum mechanics and economics are exactly alike.
*sigh*
There's a reason economics is a social science.
Why is Economics less exact than animal husbandry?
You cannot know how many calves a particular cow will produce , but you can rely on stistics to tell you within reasonable error how many calves a heard can produce.
Although the huge number of individual choices involved produces a haze on the numbers , the great number of people makeing the choices firms up the stats quite a bit.
The prediction of the motion of a single water molicule is a Quantum equation of high uncertainty and great complexity , but the behavior of a slug of water being dumped from a bucket sin't hard math at all , even though the individual molicules are winding very complex paths the water being dumped from one bucket into another does not need to account for all of the molicules individually and can be described in simple terms.
We do not have enough computeing power on the planet to account for the effect of a change of taxation on a particular individual , but the laffer curve does not pretend to do that.
We know that at one end of the curve is a Zero because collecting no taxes produces no government revenue , one could even infer that the Zero would vbe true at any rate that did not cover the expense of the IRS in collection.
On the other end we have a Zero that is just as certian because putting all of the economy into governance would be a rediculous load , this zero must extend downwards untill there is a rate at which the economy can function at some crippled level and carry a bloated government .
Where the real center of the laffer curve belongs seems to be a mystery , where the most return occurs probably is not at 50% or 80% or 20% but experiment can find the perfect point even if there is no adequate mathmatical model, if taxes are lowered and tax revenue falls this may indicate that the area below the optimum level has been entered.
But if taxes are cut and the revenue rises then the optimum might have been reached , or the optimum might still be lower .
Still unasked is whether it is correct for government to make the biggest bite on our economy that it can , this money is not a possession of the government by natural right , if the government can be run on a lower amount than the best taxes we can pay what is the point of a tax higher than that?
