stustein

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by stustein 10y ago

   > fixing it without paying the cost at the same time may still be worse. That's probably true if we're talking about a tax that's more than a rounding error on the total federal budget. In an ideal world, you'd have a
2. 2.▲
   by stustein 10y ago

   Agreed — it's a pretty weak reason to "strongly oppose" a bill, which is why I'm wondering how likely it would be for the Administration to change their position. Like, what percentage of the time do they issue a stateme
3. 3.▲
   by stustein 10y ago

   If the income is deferred, I would imagine that it wouldn't apply to AMT calculations. It'd be nice for that language to be explicit though. Regardless, the Obama Administration "strongly opposes" the bill in its current
4. 4.▲
   A/B tests are a crutch(medium.com)

   1 points by stustein 11y ago|0 comments