Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinoCoug
How many times are we going to go through this?
1. Archaea asks liberals why they support liberal economic policies.
2. Liberals explain why.
3. Archaea's argument is then reduced to, "I hate paying taxes. Taxes suck. I can't demonstrate why a moderate tax hike on the rich will hurt the economy, but stop taking my money."
|
Neither can people show it won't hurt the economy. You know this well. There will be models on both sides of the equation, as the variables are too complex to adequately forecast.
Economic liberals take the view, government programs are essential so let's find a way to fund them. It's that simple.
However, we have no comparable economic model to the most complex model, the US. All other economies in some way or another are dependent upon our success or failure.
You can cite a study or forecast that predicts "modest" increases may demonstrate some degree of elasticity, but you can't show any ironclad models that show how much is modest and whether program is net beneficial.
In reality, nobody wants their own goat to be gored. You will cloak your goring of another by a complicated prognostication but will ignore the holes in the assumptions or lack of evidence. You rarely apply business logic or modeling. That is my principle complaint, that economic liberals misuse and ignore the benefits of the market and good business principles. They rely upon others to fix their mistakes.