The Center for Freedom and Prosperity wraps up their three-part series on the Laffer Curve with this gem on dynamic scoring:
If you need to catch up, check out part one (Laffer Curve theory) and part two (Laffer Curve evidence).
Inkwell
Static Scoring vs. Dynamic Scoring
by Allison Kasic
March 19, 2008, 11:23am
1 Comment
Linda Beale | March 29, 2008, 3:23pm | #
This is no gem. It's more of the same old hoodwink them and they'll never know misinformation from Cato's Dan Mitchell. Dynamic scoring sounds nice, but in fact it doesn't, and can't work, because it depends on predicting the future. Results of any one person's dynamic scoring depend more on that person's biases about economic policies, work-leisure-savings elasticity and fairness issues than they do on actual economic consequences. In fact, if you look at the conservative think-tanks' predictions about the dynamic scoring effects of the 2001-2003 tax cuts, you'd see they predicted hundreds of thousands of jobs that didn't materialize, billions of dollars of revenues that didn't materialize, and on and on. They saw what they wanted to see.
We independent women shouldn't be hoodwinked by the mostly male elite establishment that wants tax cuts for the big CEOs while the ordinary people that work for the firm make in one year what the CEO makes in half a day or less.