Lucky... 0 #51 August 12, 2010 QuoteIf you make a claim, and people ask if you 1) have considered other factors in your analysis and 2) have more detailed explanations of the mechanisms you feel are in play to support your claim then you can either a) listen to what people have to say and bolster your argument with more information or b) yell your claim louder and become increasingly irrelevant. What's it gonna be? We all know what it's been thus far. I've addressed that other factors contribute, but when I post 100 years of data and you ignore that and head right to wanting a 300-page dissertation on teh analysis of economics in an effort to avoid the graph, then we get it; you can't refute the data so you ask for more and if I bothered you would, guess what? Ask for more. I'm not dissecting the macroeconomics of the US along with a 245-point claim, I'm making a general observation that low tax rates = high debt and other negative aspects that come with low tax rates. I realize you can't counter that so now you need to distract and blame it on something else, ask for clarity, etc. If you watch a trial you'll see the same tactics used, if a witness gets asked a question and neds time think or hopes they can move on he'll ask fior the Q to be repeated or clarified. I posted the data, show me where tax cuts lead to better economic times or enter an alternative theory. The big spending theory is lame, as the debt has fallen under times of big spending. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #52 August 12, 2010 QuoteIt's not 1% as of now, it may go to that and you can brag GWB's -6.5% shrinkage and consider that success. Typical Lucky honesty - that is to say, none. The -6.5% was only Q4 2008, not the whole presidency. In point of FACT, the real GDP had a net increase over Bush's term. Real GDP, 2005 chained dollars (quarterly): Q1 2001: 11297.2 Q4 2008: 12993.7 Real GDP, 2005 chained dollars (annual): 2001: 11347.2 2008: 13228.8Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #53 August 12, 2010 Quote I posted the data, show me where tax cuts lead to better economic times or enter an alternative theory. So have you abandoned your primary thesis, then? You keep wanting it to be about this, rather than your 40, then 70% claim. The one that you had to amend to a) except when Reagan ran a deficit or b) except when the economy was doing well (I love the second cop out) in the 90s. They would have had fun with you in grad school. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #54 August 12, 2010 QuoteI'm not dissecting the macroeconomics of the US along with a 245-point claim, I'm making a general observation that low tax rates = high debt and other negative aspects that come with low tax rates. General observations that things have historically coincided (under certain conditions) are fine, but without "dissecting the macroeconomics of the US" I'd suggest you lay off demands that taxes be set at xx% to avoid certain doom. Why don't I do it? Because I recognize how complicated it is and that I don't have the time. And even if you or I put in the time to come up with a workable model, we would end up with unknowns in our equations that would lead us into the same subjective/qualitative argument we're in now trying to set values. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #55 August 12, 2010 Quote Why don't I do it? Because I recognize how complicated it is and that I don't have the time. And even if you or I put in the time to come up with a workable model, we would end up with unknowns in our equations that would lead us into the same subjective/qualitative argument we're in now trying to set values. You could come up with an ironclad proof and if it didn't meet his expectations, he'd reject it and call you a Libertarian devil. Definitely better uses for your time. Fortunately, few in Congress share such fantasies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hwt 0 #56 August 13, 2010 I cannot understand how anyone would think that higher taxes lead the country to prosper like Lucky would have us to believe until i saw his occupation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #57 August 13, 2010 Quote I cannot understand how anyone would think that higher taxes lead the country to prosper like Lucky would have us to believe until i saw his occupation. It's a part time job isn't it?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
