Another example of “Don’t do a cost-benefit analysis. Just look at the benefits. They’re nice, aren’t they?” Yes, they are. But, assuming the tax bill caused all this (it didn’t), that’s under $2B of benefits, most one-offs. US borrowing $150B more every year to make it happen. https://twitter.com/justindsykes/status/943613449036292097 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @NGrossman81
Honest question: do you consider the money earned by people and corporations in the US to be a big pile of money that belongs to the government?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @NGrossman81
Ok, then we're not borrowing the $150B to pay for those $2B benefits. We're borrowing to pay for existing programs.*Those programs* need to have a cost-benefit analysis
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @johndbro1
One result of this bill is the US will borrow $150B a year. That’s a cost. Another is reducing the corporate tax rate, which should help competitiveness. That’s a benefit. Things not in the bill aren’t part of the cost-benefit analysis of the bill.
5:01 AM - 23 Dec 2017
from Olney, MD
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.