The Derp
Gold Member
- Apr 12, 2017
- 9,620
- 661
- 205
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #541
Why are you changing the goal posts?
You are:
1. Tax cuts were initially billed as something so wonderful that create so much growth, we would be awash in so many revenues that there wouldn't need to be spending cuts because we would have surpluses as far as the eye can see.
2. When that turned out to be a crock, the goalposts moved to the pitch that tax cuts do increase economic activity, they just need time to work.
3. When that turned out to be a crock, the goalposts moved yet again to the new pitch that tax cuts only work when coupled with spending cuts (thereby negating argument #1)
4. When that turned out to be a crock, the goalposts were uprooted and moved to an entirely new playing field. One of emotion and philosophy.
So now we get to the point in the argument where one side (yours) eschews facts and evidence in favor of trying to make a highly emotional argument so you can stand on principle since you can't stand on facts.