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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (15213)	3/23/2010 2:25:34 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

"Someone"??? It's the freaking Congressional Budget Office Yes. In other words, someone else's opinion. Arguments from authority are weak, esp. when the authority has a bad record. THE authority on scoring ALL bills. And that someone else has a history of being very wrong in scoring in this area. In fact I don't think they have gotten it right once. There rules make it almost impossible for them to get it right even when the rules aren't being gamed. Static analysis of major tax and spending changes simply doesn't work. It allows you to avoid bias, at the expense of almost insuring you can't actually get a correct result. People respond to changes in such policies with different behavior. Static analysis ignores such behavioral changes. Some policy changes produce relatively small behavioral changes, or behavioral changes that largely cancel each other out, but counting on such a response to changes like this one isn't wise. The CBO would be correct in doing so, only by luck.