[DRAFT] Laffing at the Laffer Curve

[Brackoria]

Two senators, a journalist, and a certain economist named Artur Laffer walk into a bar. Or, actually, a restaurant. While waiting for their food to arrive, they get into a discussion of the linearity of the relationship between the average national taxation on income and the received quantity of government revenue. In other words, the economist draws a curve on a napkin and 'voodoo economics' is born. Now a very well-spoken mob of its followers have kicked down your door to demand tax reform.
[Valid if]Nations with high taxes and tax brackets. If it's possible, there could be two versions of this issue, identical in text but differing in effect. One could be for nations with tax rates of 75% and higher, and one for nations with tax rates between 60% and 75%.

[Option 1] "@@LEADER@@, do you realize what this means!?!??!" shouts Judith Wanniski, the journalist present at the dinner, as she over-enthusiastically waves the legendary napkin in front of your face. "Look at this curve! The height of the curve is how much revenue the government earns from that amount of taxation. Obviously, the government won't earn any revenue when the tax rate is 0. And when the tax rate is 100%, nobody will want to work if all their money is taken by the government. But when the tax rate is somewhere in the middle, the government does earn revenue. And that means this graph needs to be a curve. And look! It's in the middle of the graph! Our current tax rate is here, lower than the height! That means we'll earn revenue if we cut taxes! It's a miracle!" As people start clamoring around her, she waves the napkin for silence. "Yeah, yeah, we don't know the exact value of where the theoretical peak of the curve is. But taxes in this nation are so high, I bet we could cut 10% and still be on the downside!"
[Effects] If we go with two issues, the lower will be: 'Very surprisingly, @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ have discovered that miracles don't exist.'
[Effects] Higher would be: 'Despite cutting taxes, government revenue has increased, which could only mean more tax cuts for corporations."

[Option 2]"Greetings, @@LEADER@@, I'm Artur Laffer. I'm afraid my curve has gotten way out of hand," says the economist himself. "You see, the peak isn't perfectly in the middle. In fact, it changes based on the economy and based on your income. Specifically, cutting taxes on the rich will boost the revenue you gain from that demographic. When taxes are high, they just won't work more. They just hover right below the next bracket. But from the middle and lower classes? Cutting taxes is going to have a negligible effect. For @@NAME@@, I'd say you should keep a flat tax rate of about 5% lower than your current average tax. It goes against everything the public thinks, but that's how good ideas get started, right?"
[Effects] Wide spread protests have erupted after taxes have been lowered substantially for the rich, but not for the poor.

[Option 3]"WHAT ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING IN YOUR OFFICE!?!?" screams your secretary, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "What are they talking about? Collecting less tax will collect more? Might seem fine to you daydreaming theoreticists, but I've working in the trenches of government for 30 years, and I can tell you that's not how the real world works! Our taxes are fine just as they are! And anyone who says otherwise should be given a slander tax!"
[Effects] A new 'tea tax' has been implemented on all the @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ who have started throwing their income checks into @@CAPITAL@@ harbor rather than pay crippling taxes on them.

[Option 4] The unified sound of several voices that has been humming quietly throughout the entire meeting swells enough to become intelligible."It goes up... It goes down... It goes up... It goes down..." chant a group of ambiguously-gendered humanoids clad in dark purple floor-length robes, hoods drawn over their heads and leaving their faces in complete shadow. One of the figures, wearing a robe of black and clutching a small doll, steps forward. "Do we not understand? The true god has arrived. It goes up, it goes down. We must worship it." The cloaked man sticks a pushpin into the chest of the doll. Behind him, one of the robed figures falls down unconscious and is carried out of the room on a stretcher. "Voodoo economics has arrived... We must worship its might."
[Effects] The new 'voodoo economics' cult has built a giant arch to be their cathedral in @@CAPITAL@@

[Australian rePublic]

Hello and welcome to Got Issues! It's always nice to see a new writer!


Nice first draft, but let's take a look.

I'm gonna be abrupt and to the point here, which is a reflection of my personlity, not your work

1. Option 1- Yes, we know what taxation is
2. Option 2- How does that work?
3. Option 3- New taxes, ha?
4. Option 4- This option's a bit silly

[The Atlae Isles]

I would suggest you cut some meat from the options and change the name. We don't normally use names that resemble them - except Edward Rump.

[Jutsa]

Don't forget William Kirk or Patrick Picard!

I actually very much like this issue - although it is a bit strange.
I doubt most people would trust a napkin, but then again, stranger things have happened.

It's a little bit too much text, in my opinion - not far too much, mind you, but just a bit too much,
and that's just my opinion.

The options, I actually do like. Just an overall tax cut, a tax cut to the rich, more imposed taxes, and creating a napkin-economics religion.

I agree with Aus, that option 4 is a bit silly - but that's about perfect for a fourth option.
After all, if pouring drugs into the drinking water and demanding ritual sacrifice can be a thing, I don't see how this couldn't be a thing.

Besides the amount of text, I do think that this issue isn't particularly unique - the way it's done certainly is,
and I do like that, although something that's mostly centered around how many taxes are imposed and to who isn't particularly new...
but, then again, taxes are a pretty common topic overall, and I do like how it's brought about in this issue.

Then again, it doesn't really matter what I think as long as the editors approve of it. Again, I'd cut down on the text a bit,
but besides that it looks like a decent issue to me!

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Don't forget William Kirk or Patrick Picard!

Or Jack Michaelson. Or a whole bunch of other characters.

Basically what The Atlae Isles said there isn't the case. We use names that resemble real folk all the time.

The main problem here is that the issue is describing a phenomenon that doesn't exist in NS, thanks to the NS simulation model. In NS, in fact, the Laffer curve is exactly wrong, with tax rising slower as you reach the highest bands, so that you get MORE government revenue per % tax rise from 98 to 99% than from 30 to 31%.

The tax and expenditure simulation has always been one of the weakest parts of the simulation, and that basically precludes a whole bunch of issues and narratives, including questions about deficit spending, sales tax, tax burden, and so on.

An issue about the Laffer curve just can't be done.

[Jutsa]

Well, it might not be a bad idea to hang onto this draft in your files somewhere,
just in case an update does occur that allows this one to become viable.

It's sad, though. It was a pretty nice issue concept.

[Yurizlansia]

Don't forget William Kirk or Patrick Picard!

I actually very much like this issue - although it is a bit strange.
I doubt most people would trust a napkin, but then again, stranger things have happened.

Reagan first heard of the Laffer curve (which he implemented in the nation's economy) after he was shown a drawing of it on a napkin at a dinner.