On 1 Sep 2004 06:11:20 -0700, (Josh Rosenbluth) wrote:

.... snip
e debt).

Your analysis amounted to nothing more than noting single-year revenue
growth for a few selected years before the tax cut (9.67% in 1977,
-3.1% in 1980, 3.42% in 1981) and a few selected years after the tax
cut (6.37% in 1987, -6.06% in 1983, 5.59% in 1984). What meaning does
that have with regards to the debt?

Josh Rosenbluth

A) A few selected years? I showed all years starting from 1975, could have
gone back farther, could have gone forward more, but the story would have
been the same. I also showed *real* per year revenue growth based upon
inflation adjusted value of that year's revenue. Even in your case, you
show that revenue started growing.
B) Why is it only income that should be considered for debt computations?
If *I* don't make as much money *I* don't SPEND as much money. Now, the
next argument you will raise is that Reagan broke the bank by spending
money we didn't have on defense in a huge indefensible defense build-up.
The fact is that if Reagan could have just increased spending on defense,
we would not have added to debt, or added minimally. The problem was that
in order to get his defense spending approved (something that he viewed as
paramount to the survival of this republic), he had to compromise and allow
entitlements to also be raised.