Article says same-o same-o on trickle down... blah blah blah...
One key difference is Trump's vs. Reagan's view on tariffs wrt those tax effects on the external balance result.
And this is revealing from Laffer the article says:
Laffer, a former member of Reagan's Economic Policy Advisory Board, told the Financial Times that Trump should not worry about America's growing trade deficit,
But yet at the same time he is claiming that the govt deficit will be under control via increased tax revenues if we adjust the tax rates to some optimum rate.
You can't say that because the two balances are included in the NIA accounting identity so actually all three balances matter including the external balance.
So Laffer manifestly remains operatively ignorant of the NIA framework. All of these economists should have to go back and take Accounting 101 and Accounting 102 and I think that would probably fix them.
This is from the Accounting 101 syllabus at Wharton and is what these people have never been trained in and thus makes them currently unqualified:
The course adopts a decision-maker perspective of accounting by emphasizing the relation between accounting data and the underlying economic events that generated them.They don't have the cognitive ability to look at an economic event and THEN accurately create the ex post accounting records that document those economic events. They have never been trained in doing this activity so they remain ignorant in this area. They just can't do it.