Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Trumps Fuzzy Budget Math rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/14/politics/cbo-trump-budget-math...

Of course, both of these are projections (Trump vs CBO), but according to the CBO, Trumps figures are relying on growth rates that have been unseen in the past decade.

But apparently, there is a pretty big gap in their projections. essentially from being mildly in the black (Trump) to a bit worse than we are now (CBO).

And the CBO could not assess what Trump has included in his analysis, the effects of his proposals, that he has yet to introduce of pass thru legislation, laughs.

So which one do you believe?


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd take CBO estimates over any of the others that the government produces without any question. The other sources are just about always more interested in arriving at a particular result rather than trying to produce a quality estimate.

It is worth noting that none of these estimates are ever actually good predictions - there's simply too many moving parts and variables in play for any to provide a really clear picture over the period of a decade. But the CBO is typically closest and at least is seeking an answer rather than trying to provide a specific result.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
I'd take CBO estimates over any of the others that the government produces without any question. The other sources are just about always more interested in arriving at a particular result rather than trying to produce a quality estimate.


In this case it may be explicit rather than implicit. I'm going from vague memory, but I think I heard someone who had looked into the process say that rather than starting with rosy assumptions (and then tweaking them if they didn't quite get the result they wanted) these guys literally put in the conclusion they wanted and told the modelers to solve for X as a growth rate to get there.

Could be I'm remembering wrong or it could be that the person was wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me given how cynical these guys have been.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Kearns
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Silence is golden.
badge
Your sea is so great and my boat is so small.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I believe Trump.

He's a genius when it comes to business fraud.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
In this case it may be explicit rather than implicit.


You're more forgiving than I am. I always expect an analysis prepared by the OMB, the DNC, the RNC, most think tanks, etc. to presume an outcome and find numbers that make that outcome magically appear. It gives them "real numbers" to base arguments on (another way of putting this is "pretty much lie about it").

When we're discussing political outcomes, I expect political inputs from any group or individual that's pushing a particular platform.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.