In response to:

Prophets and Losses: Part II

Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 11:44 AM
And now, the federal equivalent of the DMV will be deciding what medical treatment you're worthy to get. Did I understand correctly the CBO is constrained to answer only the question put to them? For example, if they're told to assume "static analysis" they will merrily make unrealistic predictions based on the bogus assumption no one will do any less of a particular kind of transaction because the tax rate went up. Once investors no longer pocket the rate of return after taxes they want, they'll stop doing it, but government mandarins will merrily assume that they'll even lose $$$ to keep doing what they were doing!
Moonbat Exterminator Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 12:24 PM
The CBO must use the assumptions that Congress gives it, regardless of whether or not they bear any resemblence to reality.
Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 1:21 PM
That was my point, basically.

Editor's Note: This column is part II in a series. Part I can be found here.

People on both sides of tax issues often speak of such things as a "$300 billion tax increase" or a "$500 billion tax decrease." That is fine if they are looking back at something that has already happened. But it can be sheer nonsense if they are talking about a proposed increase or decrease in the tax rate.

The government can only raise or lower the tax rate. Whether the actual tax revenues that the government will collect as a result will go up or...