4 ms·
The corrected charts and the author at that link say that it's inconclusive. Which is pretty safe to say. Perot charts are interesting, more detailed and trans
by jmatt 18y ago
The corrected charts and the author at that link say that it's inconclusive. Which is pretty safe to say.
Perot charts are interesting, more detailed and transparent. They cover areas you are worried about specifically the breakdown of different types of tax. If they are misleading they are transparent (enough) so that at least the user can figure it out. They cover a number of spending and tax issues:
http://perotcharts.com/category/charts/taxation-charts/ http://perotcharts.com/category/charts/taxation-charts/
http://perotcharts.com/category/charts/ http://perotcharts.com/category/charts/
- gabrielroth 18y agoHe says it's "inconclusive" in the sense that the evidence doesn't prove what Hauser claims it proves.
- jmatt 18y agoMy analysis doesn't prove this, but Hauser's Law doesn't prove the opposite. That sounds inconclusive to me.
- gabrielroth 18y agoOr with some context: 'My analysis doesn't prove [something I never claimed] but Hauser's Law doesn't prove the opposite [which Hauser and Ranson did claim].' In other words, on the growth effects of raising top tax rates he is indeed inconclusive. But on the question of whether Hauser is full of crap, he's pretty conclusive.