Low taxes promote growth (except in NY Times land)

One suspects that at the Times they live in a land that exists only through the looking glass. Economics is the study of how we allocate scarce resources among unlimited wants (according to my professors). The basic fundamental principles of economics (and supported by every bit of evidence we have) requires that demand curves slope downward (people buy more when the price is lower) and supply curves slope upward (sellers supply more when they can get higher prices). This is because people are generally rational.

In NY Times land, people apparently are not rational (but we already knew that, didn't we). Larry Kudlow explains how badly wrong the Times is in an article claiming that tax cuts do not spur growth. He writes:

No amount of academic-style econometric finagling can take away from the historical evidence that flatter and simpler taxes are the best way to maximize our economy’s potential to grow.

To think otherwise only defies the laws of common sense. Higher after-tax returns to work, investment, and entrepreneurial risk-taking will promote more employment, more capital formation, and more wealth. If it pays more to produce then people will produce more. As Dr. Laffer put it three decades ago, when you tax something more you get less of it. When you tax something less you get more of it. Higher after-tax rewards always generate a greater supply of work effort and investment capital.

Kudlow concludes by writing that he respectfully disagrees with the Times. That's the only part of his article I disagree with. The Times stopped being worthy of respect years ago.