On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Paul Tanner <email@example.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:48 AM, kirby urner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > ... >> The fact that Uncle Sam is already the world's largest single most >> indebted institution in absolute dollar terms has already changed the >> tune of eligible voters such as Mitt Romney, who now credits Big Bird >> / NPR to China et al.
<< SNIP >>
> I really don't know what it is you are trying to argue. Are you trying > to negate what I said as to how we could get the national debt to > start coming down as a percentage of GDP without having to give up > social spending? What?
Lets just say that your sanguine view that some "mathematical economics" clearly shows, that if we just dialed back to Clinton Era tax policies, that all would be well with our broke junkie Uncle Sam - -- as deficits as a percent of GDP would by hunky dory, and we could have those surpluses again -- is just empty pipe dreaming, blowing smoke.
That's like trying to model the central nervous system on some dissection of the big toe (bad analogy).
Such "mathematical economics" is a chimera, a mirage. You come across as superstitious about science on my end, like you've watched too much NUMB3RS or something (very unrealistic show that lionizes mathematics and mathematicians -- so of course most think it's great).
Another cartoon, connecting to my earlier one mentioning surpluses: