Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (768584)	2/17/2009 3:07:40 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Anybody can only count one side of the equation in a static analysis like that to come up with a phony number like that. :-0 But, remember the Laffer Curve! Exact same effect applies insofar as higher economic growth is produced --- you need to consider the DYNAMIC (Laffer-like) analysis: HOW MUCH GROWTH is to be directly produced, and how much extra revenue is then generated from the higher economic growth rates.... (The higher economic growth produces higher revenues to government which then reduces the need to borrow as much which reduces the debt.) It's the COLLAPSE of REVENUES during serious economic downturns such as this which mount the largest threat to the economy. Heritage should be ashamed of themselves for putting such a phony calculation forward like that --- without EXPLAINING what are the extremely important caveats and details that they know damn well their static analysis presupposes (yet without stating clearly). I'm certain that they know better then that.... "True cost" my ass.