"I said, at least once, perhaps more, in my posts to you that I was treating "austerity measures" as meaning spending cuts."
In other words then, Tim... what you were doing was making up an ALTERNATE REALITY that does NOT EXIST in Ireland
I was applying a label, doing so publicly in a post to you, and with no objection at the time by you. I was labeling the spending cuts as austerity measures. I didn't say there where no tax cuts. Since you now object I withdraw the label. At no time did I say tax increased didn't happen in Ireland.
And I've responded to the point about tax increases which you conviently ignore.
Again -
If your saying the austerity measures increased the deficit you are either saying (not directly, but inescapably implying)
Either
1 - "spending cuts reduced revenue more than they decreased spending"
or
2 - Tax increases reduced revenue.
or I'll add
3 - The austerity measures included some third thing, neither cutting spending, nor increasing taxes, and that third thing increased the deficit.
It has to be one of those three, their are no other options.
If its #1 I've already went in to great detail about how that's not realistic.
If its number 2, that's possible, but hardly :Standard economics" that was "Completely understood by every Irish economist and every politician there." Despite your claim that it was. Sure the Laffer curve is standard economics, but its relatively unlikely that Ireland's tax increases pushed it over the Laffer curve's inflection point.
If its number 3, then what the hell is this other austerity factor that's neither increasing taxes or decreasing spending? |
