I do agree with you, in part. To say "tax cuts don't pay for themselves", as if saying that tax cuts never pay for themselves, is clearly false--in some circumstances they would.Quote from jem:
I did not ignore anything. You stated tax cuts do not work.
I present facts... that revenue increases followed tax cuts.
Actually, Greenspan was unequivocal. You and I may disagree with his opinion on policy matters, but statements or fact are just that: fact. And this from a low-tax-loving, Ayn Rand devotee who was nominated for the Fed chairmanship by Reagan himself. So you know it wasn't easy for him to say.Quote from Ricter:
I do agree with you, in part. To say "tax cuts don't pay for themselves", as if saying that tax cuts never pay for themselves, is clearly false--in some circumstances they would.
But neither should we think that tax cuts always pay for themselves.
Quote from Lucrum:
The same Greenspan that helped create a bubble? That Greenspan?
Quote from Brass:
...You and I may disagree with his opinion on policy matters, but statements or fact are just that: fact. And this from a low-tax-loving, Ayn Rand devotee who was nominated for the Fed chairmanship by Reagan himself. So you know it wasn't easy for him to say.
I agree, the vast majority of economists do say that tax cuts do not pay for themselves, but do any of them, did Greenspan, mean to say they NEVER pay for themselves? As you have been trying to point out, it's where the cuts fall that's most important. So, some tax cuts, in some circumstances, would pay for themselves.Quote from Brass:
Actually, Greenspan was unequivocal. You and I may disagree with his opinion on policy matters, but statements or fact are just that: fact. And this from a low-tax-loving, Ayn Rand devotee who was nominated for the Fed chairmanship by Reagan himself.