No one said you were suggesting increasing gov't revenue as the sole criteria. I didn/t . But you implied that whether the program actually worked to achieve its goal was not important.First of all, why should the policy effectiveness of a tax cut need to be justified? "Lower taxes are better than higher taxes because it allows people to keep their money." Watching a so-called conservative argue in favor of a tax hike is hilarious.
Second, it has worked. It has helped people pay off debts and it has increased consumer spending.
So you don't think government policies should be judged by whether they are effective or not? : What criteria would you prefer? Sounds good?
I think there's more to judging the effectiveness of tax policy than whether or not it increased government revenues. And I don't think such an idea is cuckoo. I think it's perfectly rational.
Yes. According the CES, consumer expenditures have increased from about $9,008 per capita when the first payroll tax change (the Making Work Pay tax credit) was passed, to about $9,490 now.Do you have evidence it has worked?
Since the Tax Relief Act of 2010 was passed in December, 2010 consumer expenditures have increased from $9,345 to $9,490.
As for whether it worked, post hoc ergo propter hoc is still a fallacy.