Thank you for presenting! This is a really interesting paper and, as a non-econ major student, I was able to follow through and understand the nuanced remarks made by the authors.
I am curious to know your take on the intricacies between policy-making and party/individual politicians' agenda.
It seems that, even with the more conservative closed-economy model, the TCJA's major positive impact on the economy lasts through both terms of Trump's presidency (assuming they are aiming for a second term.) Because of the increased debt to GDP ration due to the tax revenue decline for the first 10 years of the TCJA, who ever that comes after this current administration has to clean up the mess and potentially cut government spendings. Your paper leaves me the impression that whoever come up and pass TCJA cares more about the short-term growth in the economy to the extent that they are willing to sacrifice the long-term development.
This speaks two potential problems: 1) if policy-makers are leaving detrimental effect to the economy unknowingly, they really shouldn't be the ones making policies, or 2) they know the effect, namely the possible trajectories your paper describes, but they chose to draft and pass this policy anyway. In this second case, their actions seem to be one that is, if not for personal gain, at least partisan. Who should economists approach when they want to talk about policy-making for long-term economic development?
Thank you for presenting! This is a really interesting paper and, as a non-econ major student, I was able to follow through and understand the nuanced remarks made by the authors.
I am curious to know your take on the intricacies between policy-making and party/individual politicians' agenda.
It seems that, even with the more conservative closed-economy model, the TCJA's major positive impact on the economy lasts through both terms of Trump's presidency (assuming they are aiming for a second term.) Because of the increased debt to GDP ration due to the tax revenue decline for the first 10 years of the TCJA, who ever that comes after this current administration has to clean up the mess and potentially cut government spendings. Your paper leaves me the impression that whoever come up and pass TCJA cares more about the short-term growth in the economy to the extent that they are willing to sacrifice the long-term development.
This speaks two potential problems: 1) if policy-makers are leaving detrimental effect to the economy unknowingly, they really shouldn't be the ones making policies, or 2) they know the effect, namely the possible trajectories your paper describes, but they chose to draft and pass this policy anyway. In this second case, their actions seem to be one that is, if not for personal gain, at least partisan. Who should economists approach when they want to talk about policy-making for long-term economic development?