I understood what you meant, just found it too much at a distance or ambiguous, which was a fair response given the two rehashing the time old debate over supply vs. demand fostering healthy markets and increased living standards. Those two did it in the dumbest, most basic ways possible. Neither advanced anything about equilibrium, collaborative capitalism, or the various reasons markets are unable to clear in an imperfect world. There was nothing on sticky wages, prices or costs. Nothing about deficit spending or the Keynesian cross (Cenk made an incorrect statement on tax and spend and Shapiro should have pounced with some Mankiw). Nothing about policy responding differently to different market environments. Nothing about total tax burden or benefit.
As far as Shapiro's alleged fallacy, that was a fair response IMO to Cenk's own fallacy. Cenk attempted to link high growth with high taxation and inferred causation through correlation. This is a well abused tactic by pundits from both sides. Cenk said nothing of baby boom, post depression, or the ensuing stagflation that was caused by excessive government social program spending funded by debt and combined with policy fueled by a modern leftist's wet dreams.
