Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="59 Dano" data-source="post: 3265320" data-attributes="member: 23516">How did you manage to find a specific, though baseless, prediction about a deficit while not being able to find &quot;historical precedent&quot; that GDP grows with tax cuts?&nbsp; I mean, it was just as easy to look up as &quot;bad static prediction about deficit.&quot;I recommend that those who are opposed to lower taxes and worried about the effects they may have on our fiscal health should donate some extra money to the government.&nbsp; Knowing that they won&#039;t, they should all have their taxes doubled.&nbsp;&nbsp; Sounds like a great argument against having kids out of wedlock and borrowing a bunch of money.&nbsp; Considering that we&#039;ve managed to escape the climate disasters that were supposedly unavoidable, I&#039;m not worried.&nbsp;&nbsp; Plus, I&#039;ll be dead in 2100.&nbsp; The solution to not saving for retirement is to save for retirement.&nbsp; Thankfully, you rarely present any.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="59 Dano, post: 3265320, member: 23516"] How did you manage to find a specific, though baseless, prediction about a deficit while not being able to find "historical precedent" that GDP grows with tax cuts? I mean, it was just as easy to look up as "bad static prediction about deficit." I recommend that those who are opposed to lower taxes and worried about the effects they may have on our fiscal health should donate some extra money to the government. Knowing that they won't, they should all have their taxes doubled. Sounds like a great argument against having kids out of wedlock and borrowing a bunch of money. Considering that we've managed to escape the climate disasters that were supposedly unavoidable, I'm not worried. Plus, I'll be dead in 2100. The solution to not saving for retirement is to save for retirement. Thankfully, you rarely present any. [/QUOTE]

Verification