... at just $385B over the 10 years (link below), for a net (estimate at end 2017/early 2018) of $1.1T negative deficit impact over the 10 years, assuming the CBO's intelligent, non-static growth estimates.

And with further information and analysis, the CBO has subsequently adjusted those estimates to be even *worse* for the debt and deficit (including impacts to the deficit of interest on the increased debt).

I don't know why or how you would call that a win. You spent the whole day arguing that tax revenues went up in the past year, and now you're saying that tax revenue loss is "to be expected, and as we've seen in past tax cuts, it always dropped in the first few years until growth caught up."

And of course that growth "catching up" would be predicated on continued economic growth for years to come, which, I'm sorry, is just not realistic. As much as I hope I am wrong for my own personal sake and for that of the country, we've been in such a long boom and history tells us that cycles happen and we are due for a recession at some point in the next several years.

And none of that changes the fact that you are trying to claim a "win" by comparing apples and oranges metrics - one of those being how you want to measure things and the other being how the US government measures them (not the "crooked, fake news media," but the US government).