Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
let's get this one out of the way quickly: that's not a recession, because there's no negative growth. Now, if growth is
Q1: 5%; Q2: -2.5%; Q3: -2.5%; Q4: 5%, technically we had a 2 quarter recession. But would it matter? Probably not, because the overall growth for the year was about 5% (no, I didn't do the compounding math). In that case, would we worry? Probably not. Problem here is it's more like Q1 and Q4 were 1%, so overall annual growth was small.
|
Small but not negative, so no "recession" as defined, correct? That was my only point.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) Forget marginal rates and forget the share of the tax cuts. What's most relevant is each person's tax burden at each level of income as a percent matter. Any tax cut, even a completely neutral one, will go mostly to the rich. Why? BEcause they pay a frighteningly large share of all taxes. Marginal rates are also irrelevant in determining who gets the tax cut, because at low levels it's deductions and exemptions that matter more, not marginal rates.
|
Agreed. This was the intent of my original point, I just stated it poorly.
