Taxes are a funny topic on this forum. Most here think high taxes are a necessity. This is because they are not even doing math, but are assuming their government knows best.

Well if taxes are 50% then in theory half the population can be employed by the government. Why would you need to employ that many however?

No more than 20% of your adult population should be retirees, no more than 5% should be disabled, and this leaves 25% of your adult population as government paid! Ok so 10% unemployment means 15% are government  employees or a lesser amount which are over paid.

That's a most extremely simplistic view point however.

Ultimately you can break taxes down to a percentage of the GDP  (Gross Domestic Product, which is a summary of all the cash earned in a nation for a year)

Based upon that you can then some math to see how much money gets to the government, and how much to the people (in general).

Say taxes are 35%, that everyone on average earns $100 a month. If taxes are 35% this means they pay $35. This is simple enough math for you I am sure. Lets also say the average person is putting 40% to house payments or rent, 10% to food, 10% to utilities and has therefore a 5% discretionary budget.

If taxes, under this example, are raised to 40%, then there is no discretionary budget. This means there are no 'luxuries'. If taxes however drop to 30%, then the budget for 'luxuries' has doubled.

How is this important?

Well the things we will soon call luxuries in the United States include movies, games, new pc's, new cars, vacations, stylish clothes, and the likes. In truth they are luxuries, though we have gotten so used to them that we have not considered them so for a long time.

Each luxury provides jobs outside of the core two industries of industrial manufacturing and food. Some of it is in industrial manufacturing, some in food, but a game is not a hard ware item, clothes are not heavy metal items, vacations are based upon service or other factors... These jobs are the side jobs.

And in the United States they outnumber pure industrial and farming jobs by leaps and bounds.

Therefore an increase in taxes will take away from jobs directly, with no doubt, due to less spending being able to be done. Less taxes will directly influence job creation due to larger spending in the markets in question.

This is a direct corollary.

But whats worse... there is a curve out there, one that is shaped as an upside down U. This curve, also known as the Laffer Curve.

Now some... really unintelligent people... in this forum will just spout platitudes, propaganda, and such when they see that word. To them it is the worst thing to see short of Christianity.

Laffer said there is a two points on the curve that will result in the same revenue for the Government, with one side resulting in less money for people, and the other resulting in more money for people.

The big deal here is that lower taxes = more money in our pockets, and more jobs in total, while higher taxes = less money in our pockets and less jobs in total.

And my demonstration at the start of this section shows proof of this policy, more money for luxuries is equal to more jobs being created. Less money for luxuries is less jobs total.

The other proposed economic models are garbage, only Laffer (and the ones who inspired him to create his curve) are correct.