On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:09 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Shane Mage <shmage at pipeline.com> wrote:
>
>> He rejects them because they are derived from contradictory
>> premises about economic and expenditure growth. Therefore invalid
>> by definition, ie., "no way." The CBO is nothing but bipartisan
>> bullshit, always has been always will be.
>
> "No way" and "bipartisan bullshit" - now those are seriously
> rigorous responses!
Those phrases are just other ways to describe the rigorous argument: their premises are contradictory, as has been spelled out repeatedly at *naked capitalism* and elsewhere. So if you want to treat the CBO as some sort of authority you are obliged to justify them and refute the criticism. Or formulate your own *internally consistent* projection of an economic evolution in which national debt somehow becomes what it obviously is not at present: a problem.
Shane Mage
This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
kindling in measures and going out in measures.
Herakleitos of Ephesos