Quote:
Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
If you have a fairer yardstick (I'm not joining the "metric" crowd - I'm old school) I'd be interested to hear it.
|
Not trying to be snarky, but, yeah - votes.
Reason I say that is, performance numbers are more akin to weather patterns than widget production. Too many variables. I think it would be more accurate to forecast effects of tax cuts with ranges, or trends, than with hard numbers. If the numbers are failing to meet the published expectations (I don't remember those), but are trending the right way, is it a failure? I don't think that case has been made.
The numbers, like I said, are like the weather. If they get it right two out of five days, they're doing well, becuase no one can correct for the beeelyons and beeelyons of variables. So, significant? Not really. The trend is significant. Can I completely and firmly credit the tax cuts for this? Nope. But I can lean that way while acknowledging the futility of precise measurement.
Threaded Mode