[Conservative Goddess]

Absolutely correct.....

Dynamic scoring IS the way to go.....but the science is in its infancy. The models must solve simultaneous, non-linear, differential equations at multiple loci to truly model the global economy. Mathematically speaking, it is the same problem that the global climate models must solve. If done well, it is mind-numbingly complex and limited by our current computing capacity.

Here's an interesting paper on the subject: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/cda04-05.cfm

[pigdog]

I'm not so sure that so much complexity is actually required - maybe yes, maybe no - but in any event it seems to make litle sense to stick with the analysis technique that has been substantially off target 100% of the time as present methods have been.

Even a finger to the wind might do better that that.

[Taxman]

Thanks for the link. I'll be sure to read the report.

YOu would not be an economist, would you?

[RobFromGa]

The models must solve simultaneous, non-linear, differential equations at multiple loci to truly model the global economy. Mathematically speaking, it is the same problem that the global climate models must solve. If done well, it is mind-numbingly complex and limited by our current computing capacity.

The biggest problem is that we don't know what the differential equations are. Small changes make large changes in only a relatively few iterations. And we are a long way from defining these equations.

But we can easily just keep dropping the tax rate until we see no further positive impact.