NYT Editorial on Greenspan's suggestion to raise taxes to get....

[whistle]

...the deficit under control (sorry if this has already been posted, but it's time that the New York Times came out and called Greenspan's pandering to the Bush administration and the neo-conservative position on preferential tax breaks for the wealthy):

<snip>

March 4, 2005
EDITORIAL
Greenspan Talks Tax Increases

It's a sad thing, really, that it has taken this long for the chairman of the Federal Reserve to finally suggest that Congress consider tax increases to close the nation's gargantuan budget deficit. That should be a no-brainer, especially since the deficit - now at $412 billion - is largely due to tax cuts that President Bush and Congress have lavished on the most affluent over the past four years.

The recognition of the obvious by the Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan, followed much waffling and was accompanied by oracular talk of spending cuts and his familiar act of fealty to Mr. Bush: a vague endorsement of private accounts in Social Security. In the end, all the huffing and puffing is testament to the strength of the anti-tax fixation of the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress, which has produced reckless tax cuts during wartime and a weak dollar in place of budgetary discipline. But as Mr. Greenspan has now made clear, the profligacy must end. "Unless we do something to ameliorate" rising debt levels, he told the House Budget Committee on Wednesday, "we will be in a state of stagnation."

It's not Mr. Greenspan's place to be too specific about what lawmakers need to do, and not do. But a couple of things should now be clear to anyone who is concerned about healing the economy: there can be no new life for old tax cuts - and no new tax cuts.

<more>
<link> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/04/opinion/04fri1.html?th=&pagewanted=print&position=

[pacalo]

1. "Reckless tax cuts during wartime".

Is it just me or does anyone else feel insulted when reading that phrase? The word "wartime" is used as though there's some legitimacy to our being in Iraq.

After the first stolen election in 2000, he cut taxes for the top 2%, then manipulated a war with Iraq -- a needless, contrived, pre-emptive war.

Now he's aiming to cut so many social programs for the poor, and has the audacity to cut veterans' benefits while he demands so much of & gives so little to the military in Iraq.

Disgusting.

[whistle]

2. You aren't alone, this war is as phony as a three dollar bill...

...but oh so more costly! A friend shared the following with me by e-mail just a few minutes ago:

<snip>

Whistle:

Here is something else. I finally watched my taped Sundays conservative "McGlocklin Report" on PBS tonight.

Quote, "evacuated from Iraq due to death, wounds,illness, suicide, psychological injuries -- 35,500 soldiers."

That Whistle, is more then a division.

'Welcome to Hotel California!'

NP

<my reply> That is a small city!

[pacalo]

3. 35,500 soldiers. :(

Anyone who rabidly defends this administration or displays a yellow "Support the Troops" ribbon on their car should enlist now. Our troops could use some real support.

[thethinker]

4. The McGlaughlin Report was good this week.

He also pointed out that America is 25th in life expectancy now. He summed it up and said the reason was because Americans don't have health care. He even had charts showing all the countries where people live longer than American (all the ones with national health care).

I don't remember seeing anything in the papers about this.