What happened in Kansas should be a lesson for policymakers.
First of all, I would contest the notion that an experience in a small rural state maps to the entire nation particularly well. Kind of like when Estonia had good results from going to an austerity budget and a flat tax. Any suggestion that such would work here was kicked to the curb for that reason.
So, no, Kansas doesn’t disprove supply side theory any more than Texas along proves it. Economics (and I find it odd that I have to state this) is a bit more complicated than that.
What tends to occur, in my view, is that ANY tax system (this would be true, then for Texas if they chose to implement an income tax, just as it would for New York if they decided to get rid of theirs) becomes codified into the business practices of the small and medium sized businesses which primarily operate in that state. Change forces a very unproductive retrenching of operations which logically results in depressed business activity for an adjustment period. Simply put, if a state has an aggressive depreciation policy on capital equipment, and then suddenly gets rid of it, my current and future capital acquisition strategy suddenly needs to be rethought. And when businesses are forced to “rethink”, they shelter in place until the impact of the changes are fully understood.
So, no……..your premise, which could be stated as “As Kansas goes, so goes the Nation”…..I’d have to reject.