Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL ....static models don't work...oh no...sure they don't.
Because the only way your B.S can work is if you put disparage all economic modeling....
That way your B.S can enter the equation.
Don't believe the economists....believe Hannity and Beck.
you still dont get it, and you never will. our economy is a dynamic one, if you raise taxes, you get less revenue, not more. it has been proven time and time again in the annals of history, but you refuse to even look back in history, thus you are doomed to repeat said history.
if raising taxes would increase revenues, i would be right behind you pushing for a moderate tax increase. but the reality is that raising taxes to increase revenues is a progressive fantasy. the only way we are going to increase revenues to the government is to increase the tax base, and that means we need more people working and spending money.
you still dont get it, and you never will. our economy is a dynamic one, if you raise taxes, you get less revenue, not more. it has been proven time and time again in the annals of history, but you refuse to even look back in history, thus you are doomed to repeat said history.
if raising taxes would increase revenues, i would be right behind you pushing for a moderate tax increase. but the reality is that raising taxes to increase revenues is a progressive fantasy. the only way we are going to increase revenues to the government is to increase the tax base, and that means we need more people working and spending money.
I've even posted a graph showing revenues for the last 70 years, showing revenues remained rather consistant, despite the changes in tax rate. They still dont get it, but these are the same people who post tax cuts increased the deficit, even though reality is, it increased revenues.. You'd think they'd stop embarassing themself after awhile..
you still dont get it, and you never will. our economy is a dynamic one, if you raise taxes, you get less revenue, not more. it has been proven time and time again in the annals of history, but you refuse to even look back in history, thus you are doomed to repeat said history.
if raising taxes would increase revenues, i would be right behind you pushing for a moderate tax increase. but the reality is that raising taxes to increase revenues is a progressive fantasy. the only way we are going to increase revenues to the government is to increase the tax base, and that means we need more people working and spending money.
Wow. A right wing intellectual. "our economy is dynamic"...therefore "static modeling" doesn't work.
Did you notice all the objective sourcing he gave us that showed "static modeling" doesn't work?
Maybe he doesn't need to because he's an expert?
rbohm could you post your expert credentials on the wrongness of economic static modeling in "dynamic" economies?
Wow. A right wing intellectual. "our economy is dynamic"...therefore "static modeling" doesn't work.
Did you notice all the objective sourcing he gave us that showed "static modeling" doesn't work?
Maybe he doesn't need to because he's an expert?
rbohm could you post your expert credentials on the wrongness of economic static modeling in "dynamic" economies?
Congress already uses dynamic accounting because they acknowledge static modeling doesnt work.. And even the CBO, Urban Institute, Harvard University, notes errors in the static modeling.
Congress already uses dynamic accounting because they acknowledge static modeling doesnt work.. And even the CBO, Urban Institute, Harvard University, notes errors in the static modeling.
Typical response.. simply attack others for posting facts that dispute yours, and then respond with a blog, that doesnt even support your position.
Again, static models DONT WORK.. The country is not STATIC.. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? Ohh I get it, its because it would stop you from just making things up.. We all know you dont want to stop doing that..
Again, did you see the CBO chart above? They use a static model, and you keep claiming thats accurate (I note you completely ignored it, odd)
Typical response.. simply attack others for posting facts that dispute yours, and then respond with a blog, that doesnt even support your position.
Again, static models DONT WORK.. The country is not STATIC.. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? Ohh I get it, its because it would stop you from just making things up.. We all know you dont want to stop doing that..
Again, did you see the CBO chart above? They use a static model, and you keep claiming thats accurate (I note you completely ignored it, odd)
Of course the do. You use the CBO data when it suits your purpose, you disparage it when it doesn't.
You were caught doing this long ago.....badmouthing the CBO estimates....but two days before using their data to bolster your half-truths.
Of course the do. You use the CBO data when it suits your purpose, you disparage it when it doesn't.
You were caught doing this long ago.....badmouthing the CBO estimates....but two days before using their data to bolster your half-truths.
Nope.. not response in regards to the CBO data being so wrong..
And I do quote the CBO, when Democrats like to use it, but the CBO admits their data is flawed, (just like the Obamacare estimates)..
Again, since you keep ignoring it, why has the CBO data been so wrong, if you claim the static model works?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.