Is there such a thing? What was that sound, Aristotle turning in his grave. I think you mena reasoning from axioms. In logic there are things you accept as the premise of the argument, and you call them axioms. Then you apply logic to those and get your answer.

You don't seem to be doing this, what you are doing is arguing from anecdotal evidence. Basically that's using hearsay. Where you and I differ is that I believe the question is based on economics and science and you believe it is based on anecdotes, common sense, and winging it.

The two approaches are completely different. What I want to see is experts explain why the tax cut was so good as an economic stimulus and I can't find any. I am unwilling to just pretend it was without some sort of expert opinon.

The main reason for this is I don't believe you can run a large modern economy on the sort of reasoning you are employing. Consequently when I see Bush go against what appear to be the mainstream economics experts and then the economy does badly by historical standards the natural conclusion to draw is that either his experts messed it up or they weren't experts.

There's nothing unusual about this line of reasoning, the same thing happened with the Challenger and 9/11. Experts were in charge, there was a bad outcome and typically there is an enquiry into what the experts did. I see plenty of blogs from well respected economists that say Bush screwed it all up by doing dumb things to the economy. SOme of these dumb things are too much spending which you agree with, you don't agree about the tax cut part.

So having read those arguments I want to see the other side, which for all I know may be correct and all of this is just bad luck on Bush's part. To see that petitions signed by people don't cut it. I've read plenty of expert opinions on why the tax cut was skewed to the rich and so didn't stimulate the economy and thus deepened the economic malaise. Also this lead to states having to raise taxes which had a contractionary effect.

Now all of this is plausible and well supported by economic theory that I know and what the experts appear to be citing, so I tend to believe it. I don't know because I see nothing on the other side, no refutations. Econopundit is one that tries, but these are serious charges, that the experts in the Bush adminstration are hucksters or incomptetents and messed it all up.

I think it's quite clear what I am asking for and why. Like you say there may well be experts somewhere who can give a credible reply to these accusations. You continually assert you know what you are talking about in refuting these experts so not unnaturally I ask you. You may not have any evidence other than some kind of intuition/common sense/libertarianism. That doesn't mean you are wrong, it just means you can't show experts to back you up.