http://penguin42.livejournal.com/ ([identity profile] penguin42.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] talkpolitics 2010-08-26 02:46 am (UTC)


You can call it a talking point if you want, but it is what they do. They take what is offered and work with that. The CBO does not act independently - that "new evidence" Elmendorf talks about is information provided to them. If no one provides new evidence, they're not going to include it in the scores.


You're really going to have to provide a source for this. I don't believe that the CBO is not allowed to independently research the facts behind their analyses. It's true that they limit the scope to what's requested, but how they come to their conclusions -- as far as I understand -- is completely up to them.

Again, Elmendorf agreed with this statement: "If the stimulus bill did not do what it was originally forecast to do, then that would not have been detected by the subsequent analysis, right?"

It's true that the CBO analysis is not an empirical verification of the results of the stimulus bill (this is something I actually learned from your links, so thank you). However, I think the point is -- there is no empirical verification possible at this point. Ultimately, we don't know yet how well it's working or not, but the best economic models we have say it probably is.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting