Thread by @delong

@Noahpinion You do know that this is my reading of the subtext in Mayk Boskin's "defense" <project-syndicate.org/commentary/rep…> against Larry Summers & Jason Furman of his claims <wsj.com/articles/how-t…> <project-syndicate.org/commentary/rep…> that the McConnell-Ryan-Trump TCJA tax cut for the rich would boost 1/

@Noahpinion GDP by 4-7%? The vibe in Boskin's piece is **very** defensive: "the end product usually diverges from what economists would consider ideal. ..." "the current tax bill could, in principle, have been better..." "the question, then, is whether a viable final bill will be better2/

@Noahpinion than the status quo..." "I certainly respect Summers and Furman’s right to their views..." "there are legitimate differences of opinion..." "the actual tax provisions people and businesses will be required to use have yet to be written..." Now if I had just played a role 3/

@Noahpinion pushing through a policy change that promised a 4-7% increase in national income $800-$1400B/year, discounted at 2.5% is $32-$56 trillion of added national wealth in present value, I would not have been at all defensive about it, and would not mourn the gap between Plato's 4/

@Noahpinion Forms & the Sewer of Romulus. I would be all: "We did very good, & in 10 years you are going to be crawling on your bellies begging me to accept your apology". But that's not what Boskin says. What he says is: "I believe that the current reform may well have deviated further 5/

@Noahpinion from the ideal had we not offered our analysis and advice..." I read this as: "We had to tell lies in order to get into the room to make it better", and as a whimper that we not be too hard on him. Am I wrong? 6/END

@Noahpinion @threadreaderapp unroll #unroll #thread #threadreader #econtwitter