[phil_will1]

“Which is to say that other nations tax less than we do.”

No, that is NOT what I am saying. I am saying that it is the presence/absence of a border adjustment mechanism for both this country and our trading partners which is causing these economic distortions. You can have high levels of taxation with and without a border adjustment mechanism and you can have low levels of taxation with and without a border adjustment mechanism. The two have very little to do with each other.

You continue to ignore subtleties such as static vs dynamic scoring and the importance of a border adjustment mechanism in affecting the balance of trade and insist that the structure of the tax system is irrelevant. In your mind, the only variable affecting the tax system’s effect on the economy is the level of taxation, and not the structure of the system. I think that you would find that most economists would agree that even if we could reduce the overall tax burden by 25% (which would be enormous in today’s environment), the structural problems with the current tax system would still contribute to a number of adverse economic trends.

While I respect your view that tax rates are everything, I do not agree with it.

[Filo]

The two have very little to do with each other.

No, they have a lot to do with each other, and that discussion doesn't refute what I said at all. . .

You continue to ignore subtleties such as static vs dynamic scoring and the importance of a border adjustment mechanism in affecting the balance of trade and insist that the structure of the tax system is irrelevant. In your mind, the only variable affecting the tax system’s effect on the economy is the level of taxation, and not the structure of the system.

Ultimately that is correct.

Yes structure and some other factors contribute but they are ultimately in the noise relative to the absolute level of government involvement in the economy.

Lower taxes and raise GDP, raise taxes and lower GDP.

That is absolute.

The rest is, at best, tweaking. I think that you would find that most economists would agree that even if we could reduce the overall tax burden by 25% (which would be enormous in today’s environment), the structural problems with the current tax system would still contribute to a number of adverse economic trends.

True, but we'd still increase economic productivity dramatically in spite of those trends.

While I respect your view that tax rates are everything, I do not agree with it.

They are not everything but they are far and away the most important thing.

If someone is diagnosed with cancer and also has a zit treating the zit while ignoring the cancer is a fairly stupid course, wouldn't you say?

And yet Fair Taxers want to adress the blemish first.

I disagree.

[Hostage]

Excellent points Phil. FR is fortunate to have you commenting here.

The issue of clinging to static versus dynamic scoring is a particularly egregious one by staffers in Executive and Congress joint committees. Congress has been told, even mandated to use dynamic scoring yet the low level staffers continue to drag their feet and ignore the instructions.

Dittos also to your point out the border adjustment issue.

Now about that 16th Amendment provision....that one still needs work!