I see your attempts at humor haven't improved any with your absence. Maybe the next <s>time</s> alias eh?
Tax cuts shouldn't have to "pay for themselves" because it's not the government's money to begin with. The government is a mega-parasite that needs to stop sucking blood out of the future..
I do agree with you, in part. To say "tax cuts don't pay for themselves", as if saying that tax cuts never pay for themselves, is clearly false--in some circumstances they would. But neither should we think that tax cuts always pay for themselves.
Actually, Greenspan was unequivocal. You and I may disagree with his opinion on policy matters, but statements or fact are just that: fact. And this from a low-tax-loving, Ayn Rand devotee who was nominated for the Fed chairmanship by Reagan himself. So you know it wasn't easy for him to say.
No, it never mattered because your question is BS, like you. P.S. Is your life so miserable that you have nothing better to do than obsess about our issues?
I agree, the vast majority of economists do say that tax cuts do not pay for themselves, but do any of them, did Greenspan, mean to say they NEVER pay for themselves? As you have been trying to point out, it's where the cuts fall that's most important. So, some tax cuts, in some circumstances, would pay for themselves.