4 ms·

It's important to recognize that these "tax hikes" come from expiring legislation that temporarily cut the marginal tax rate for many. That these tax cuts have

It's important to recognize that these "tax hikes" come from expiring legislation that temporarily cut the marginal tax rate for many. That these tax cuts have existed without commensurate cuts in government spending and in fact corresponded with enormous amounts of additional spending (primarily for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug benefit), have resulted in a nearly 7.5 trillion dollar increase in the national debt by September, 2009. I'm not an economist, so I can't say for certain what the correct course of action here should be. But the effective result of these "tax hikes" is to return the marginal income tax rates to what they were a decade ago.

Osiris 16y ago
There is actually fairly solid economic evidence that the "Bush tax-cuts" were extremely damaging to the economy precisely because the cuts were not made with corresponding reductions in spending. I find it interesting that the Republican party advertises itself as fiscally conservative while obeying none of the tenants of fiscal conservatism such as maintaining a balanced budget. Keysian economics (use gov't spending to boost the economy out of recession) only works when there is a corresponding cut in spending after exiting the recession. In other words, over a period of time there can be deficits but only if replaced with equally large surpluses. A consistent state of deficit spending is unsound and unwise, to say the least.
hga 16y ago
See the last three paragraphs of this reply in another thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1500697 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1500697, most specifically the final question: Is raising tax rates a good prescription for today's economic problems? Or to better focus it on HN related business issues: will socking small businesses (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1499419 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1499419) and decreasing the return on non-tax advantaged investments by the "rich", e.g. angel investors who by definition are "rich", help people like us start up tasty new companies?

Osiris 16y ago

There is actually fairly solid economic evidence that the "Bush tax-cuts" were extremely damaging to the economy precisely because the cuts were not made with corresponding reductions in spending. I find it interesting that the Republican party advertises itself as fiscally conservative while obeying none of the tenants of fiscal conservatism such as maintaining a balanced budget. Keysian economics (use gov't spending to boost the economy out of recession) only works when there is a corresponding cut in spending after exiting the recession. In other words, over a period of time there can be deficits but only if replaced with equally large surpluses. A consistent state of deficit spending is unsound and unwise, to say the least.

hga 16y ago

See the last three paragraphs of this reply in another thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1500697 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1500697, most specifically the final question: Is raising tax rates a good prescription for today's economic problems? Or to better focus it on HN related business issues: will socking small businesses (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1499419 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1499419) and decreasing the return on non-tax advantaged investments by the "rich", e.g. angel investors who by definition are "rich", help people like us start up tasty new companies?