I wonder if we look at Krugman's number the same way. trzaska's point was that tax cuts were so successful that we've seen jump in revenue (or in revenue grows, or whatever) and so we need to continue this experiment.

Krugman proved it to be wrong - tax cutes resulted in decline of revenue grows. The grows that trzaska's was so exciting about resulted from nothing more than population and inflation grows. According to Krugman's number, if we didn't cut the taxes, we would've seen even bigger grows than that. This kinda defeats the whole point trzaska's was trying to make.