Re: Tax Cuts Don't Boost Revenues

On Feb 28, 10:49=A0am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> > Though I am surprised that you denounced Friedman's theory before
> > you've even studied it. Well, not really.
>
> I've seen the real world effects. =A0That's what tests a theory, not
> whether the faux Nobel team gives its approval. =A0And his "permanent"
> income applies to individuals, not across economic levels. =A0The paper
> as much as admits it by noting how everybody's favorite proxy for the
> poor, blacks, have a lower propensity to spend.

You still haven't accurately described Friedman's hypothesis, so I
don't take your criticisms very seriously.

The Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) is actually an interesting
piece of Keynesian theory. The original idea was that the wealthy
spent less of every extra dollar of income than the less wealthy. This
led to "underconsumption" in Keynesian parlance. But Friedman's work
refuted this by noting that people with a high income in any given
year tend to have received a single-year windfall, which they tended
to save rather than spend.

Again, there's probably a Nobel in it for you if you can disprove
Friedman. Have at it.

> You mean a talented entrepreneur like Jobs could screw up a startup?

Sure. Odds are that even a startup from an experienced group of
entrepreneurs will fail. Sand Hill is full of experienced VCs who fund
startups, most of which fail. But the odds are better with Steve.

> > like the cube and
> > the then-immature optical media. But of course the software is the
> > basis for the current OS X.
>
> Weren't you claiming before that it had nothing to do with technology,
> that the Howard Roarks of the world are the im****tant part?

Given two ideas, you fund the group that has experience. If you come
to a VC with just a good idea odds are he won't fund you without
bringing on a management team. (Which he can arrange, for a price.)


> > Have you ever done a startup, as an employee or principal?
>
> Nope.

Why am I not surprised that you nonetheless are willing to redesign
Silicon Valley based on your feelings of envy.

> I still don't think they should make outrageous amounts of money.

Apparently you don't want any more Apples, Ciscos, Intels, Googles,
Yahoos, or any others of the companies that have employed thousands
and reshaped the economy.