<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tax cuts and giveaways won&#8217;t save the economy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:58:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: 2pesos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1671</link>
		<dc:creator>2pesos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Dec 2010 11:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/?p=568#comment-1671</guid>
		<description>ayesee, thank you for your informative comments. I worked in the so called health care field for many years also, and I am appalled and embarrassed by what I see today.

Unfortunately, both parties have figured out how to milk the cow, no matter what &quot;we the people&quot; say at the polls.
After all. &quot;We the people&quot;, will jump on the entitlement bandwagon when goodies are offered, no matter what sort of politics they have spouted in the past. 

The US Department of Health and Human Services seems to be made of Teflon. They are responsible for so much of the health care fiasco, and yet are rarely even mentioned.What is THEIR budget?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ayesee, thank you for your informative comments. I worked in the so called health care field for many years also, and I am appalled and embarrassed by what I see today.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, both parties have figured out how to milk the cow, no matter what &#8220;we the people&#8221; say at the polls.<br />
After all. &#8220;We the people&#8221;, will jump on the entitlement bandwagon when goodies are offered, no matter what sort of politics they have spouted in the past. </p>
<p>The US Department of Health and Human Services seems to be made of Teflon. They are responsible for so much of the health care fiasco, and yet are rarely even mentioned.What is THEIR budget?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ayesee</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1642</link>
		<dc:creator>ayesee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/?p=568#comment-1642</guid>
		<description>BHOlied is right about one thing at least, that Medicare and SS need fixed.  In my view, according to what I see on a daily basis in my work, there is much waste in Medicare because there is much waste, overpriced and unnecessary services and products, in our so-called healthcare system.  According to a comment by one CEO of a large healthcare complex in the Seattle area a few years ago, half of what is spent in healthcare in the US is a waste.  That honest appraisal is from a person who was making his living on much of the high dollar services which are often overkill or unnecessary (think: spine surgeries, for a start).  Think: Scooters. Think: home kidney care for those who took too much acetaminophen (Tylenol) for their headaches when things such as chiropractic care (only partially covered by Medicare) would serve them better.  
Our &quot;healthcare&quot; system is just overpriced disease care for a country with unhealthy lifestyles, stuffed on processed &quot;food&quot;, thinking medicines are the way to be healthy while you smoke and eat as much as you want.

Social Security pays 50% benefit to a spouse who worked little or none, while the working spouse also collects their full benefit.  On the other hand, those who are self-employed are actually paying double payments into SS, by having to pay both the employee and the employer amounts out of their income.  

It is like this: I am self-employed as a sole-proprietor in a very labor intensive, equipment intensive occupation. Over 12% of everything I bring in goes to Social Security, for the employer as well as the employee contributions.  This does not include employee and employer payments to Medicare.  Yet, the person who maybe worked 2-4 years then became the household manager gets 50% SS benefits for not working 30-40 years like most of us do.

Payments to help support kids of deceased SS contributors are one thing, and a good thing.  But payments to a spouse just because they did not work and stayed at home, while other people work AND do all of the things that need to be done at home?  That is the crazy part, the fat part, that needs to be cut.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BHOlied is right about one thing at least, that Medicare and SS need fixed.  In my view, according to what I see on a daily basis in my work, there is much waste in Medicare because there is much waste, overpriced and unnecessary services and products, in our so-called healthcare system.  According to a comment by one CEO of a large healthcare complex in the Seattle area a few years ago, half of what is spent in healthcare in the US is a waste.  That honest appraisal is from a person who was making his living on much of the high dollar services which are often overkill or unnecessary (think: spine surgeries, for a start).  Think: Scooters. Think: home kidney care for those who took too much acetaminophen (Tylenol) for their headaches when things such as chiropractic care (only partially covered by Medicare) would serve them better.<br />
Our &#8220;healthcare&#8221; system is just overpriced disease care for a country with unhealthy lifestyles, stuffed on processed &#8220;food&#8221;, thinking medicines are the way to be healthy while you smoke and eat as much as you want.</p>
<p>Social Security pays 50% benefit to a spouse who worked little or none, while the working spouse also collects their full benefit.  On the other hand, those who are self-employed are actually paying double payments into SS, by having to pay both the employee and the employer amounts out of their income.  </p>
<p>It is like this: I am self-employed as a sole-proprietor in a very labor intensive, equipment intensive occupation. Over 12% of everything I bring in goes to Social Security, for the employer as well as the employee contributions.  This does not include employee and employer payments to Medicare.  Yet, the person who maybe worked 2-4 years then became the household manager gets 50% SS benefits for not working 30-40 years like most of us do.</p>
<p>Payments to help support kids of deceased SS contributors are one thing, and a good thing.  But payments to a spouse just because they did not work and stayed at home, while other people work AND do all of the things that need to be done at home?  That is the crazy part, the fat part, that needs to be cut.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Butch_from_PA</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1640</link>
		<dc:creator>Butch_from_PA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 15:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/?p=568#comment-1640</guid>
		<description>Anyone who leads a strong challenge to this continued Bush-era tax policy will be the next president.

In the last few days - every Democrat and most Republican I know are astounded by this fiscal irresponsibility and all the Democrats will not vote Democrat in 2 years.

They feel duped by a smooth talking politician running a pack of weaklings.

Someone like Brazil&#039;s Lula will start to emerge by this summer and become the hard left socialist party that will receive the majority of the votes in 2012.

Both</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone who leads a strong challenge to this continued Bush-era tax policy will be the next president.</p>
<p>In the last few days &#8211; every Democrat and most Republican I know are astounded by this fiscal irresponsibility and all the Democrats will not vote Democrat in 2 years.</p>
<p>They feel duped by a smooth talking politician running a pack of weaklings.</p>
<p>Someone like Brazil&#8217;s Lula will start to emerge by this summer and become the hard left socialist party that will receive the majority of the votes in 2012.</p>
<p>Both</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Buzz123</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1638</link>
		<dc:creator>Buzz123</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 01:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/?p=568#comment-1638</guid>
		<description>Why do we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot?

To save our economy - and our way of life, we must take steps to re-open our closed factories.  There is nothing that is made overseas that cannot be made here, and  I include  the service sector which we so mistakenly outsourced to India and other foreign locations.  

The expertise and training potential to get this done are available  this very moment.  a quality American product will sell, but we are running out of chances to get it right.  Along with a rebirth of American manufacturing, there is the issue of a neglected and outdated  infrastructure which must be addressed concurrently.

This is a nonpartisan issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot?</p>
<p>To save our economy &#8211; and our way of life, we must take steps to re-open our closed factories.  There is nothing that is made overseas that cannot be made here, and  I include  the service sector which we so mistakenly outsourced to India and other foreign locations.  </p>
<p>The expertise and training potential to get this done are available  this very moment.  a quality American product will sell, but we are running out of chances to get it right.  Along with a rebirth of American manufacturing, there is the issue of a neglected and outdated  infrastructure which must be addressed concurrently.</p>
<p>This is a nonpartisan issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BHOlied</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1636</link>
		<dc:creator>BHOlied</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 19:17:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/?p=568#comment-1636</guid>
		<description>Gregg,
[The argument that extending the 2003 tax cuts is needed to boost the economy simply ignores that the economy declined with these cuts in place. Federal income taxes (for the working class and the middle class as well as the rich) were reduced in 2001 and again in 2003. Right after that, the economy began to sputter.]

The economy began to sputter in 2003?  According to what?  GDP increased through 2008?  The market was booming - what is your definition of sputtering? 

[Corporations aren’t investing to spark new growth and create more jobs because they think Washington’s Democrats and Republicans alike are running the country into the ground]

Um, wrong, they aren&#039;t investing in the government because they don&#039;t know which industry Obama will attack next.  They don&#039;t trust him and when there is great risk in the markets its a safe bet to keep funds readily available.  Also, the government has been driving GDP through its stimulus so the &#039;true&#039; growth of the actual economy is impossible to see.

And this is my favorite:
[Bear in mind, when the early 1990s recession afflicted the country, President Bill Clinton did not back any form of giveaways. Instead he reigned in federal spending in order to reduce the deficit and create confidence the United States was becoming more valuable, not less.  This worked! The deficit declined and the decade that followed was the best-ever economically for the nation.]

Actually Clinton strengthened the Community Reinvestment Act which required banks to lend.  As we all know a few years later, the housing market crashed and the FHA began to bleed red.  Banks went under, Fannie and Freddie are hundreds of billions in the red and counting.  Clinton’s giveaway was to those who should not have had homes because they did not have any skin in the game and did not have the resources (INCOME) to own a home.  The best example of shoty govt economics ever.  &quot;Best-ever economically&quot; HA what a joke.  

How do you like the economy now?  Just because Clinton isn&#039;t in office doesn&#039;t mean he didn&#039;t start the train down the mountain, and yes, Bush continued it, guilty party #2, but he&#039;s not mentioned in your article – neither is the big picture.  Taxes are a small piece of the pie here – Social Security and Medicare are the 10,000lb elephants in the room.  And they need to be fixed.  Forget tax cuts, lets fix entitlements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gregg,<br />
[The argument that extending the 2003 tax cuts is needed to boost the economy simply ignores that the economy declined with these cuts in place. Federal income taxes (for the working class and the middle class as well as the rich) were reduced in 2001 and again in 2003. Right after that, the economy began to sputter.]</p>
<p>The economy began to sputter in 2003?  According to what?  GDP increased through 2008?  The market was booming &#8211; what is your definition of sputtering? </p>
<p>[Corporations aren’t investing to spark new growth and create more jobs because they think Washington’s Democrats and Republicans alike are running the country into the ground]</p>
<p>Um, wrong, they aren&#8217;t investing in the government because they don&#8217;t know which industry Obama will attack next.  They don&#8217;t trust him and when there is great risk in the markets its a safe bet to keep funds readily available.  Also, the government has been driving GDP through its stimulus so the &#8216;true&#8217; growth of the actual economy is impossible to see.</p>
<p>And this is my favorite:<br />
[Bear in mind, when the early 1990s recession afflicted the country, President Bill Clinton did not back any form of giveaways. Instead he reigned in federal spending in order to reduce the deficit and create confidence the United States was becoming more valuable, not less.  This worked! The deficit declined and the decade that followed was the best-ever economically for the nation.]</p>
<p>Actually Clinton strengthened the Community Reinvestment Act which required banks to lend.  As we all know a few years later, the housing market crashed and the FHA began to bleed red.  Banks went under, Fannie and Freddie are hundreds of billions in the red and counting.  Clinton’s giveaway was to those who should not have had homes because they did not have any skin in the game and did not have the resources (INCOME) to own a home.  The best example of shoty govt economics ever.  &#8220;Best-ever economically&#8221; HA what a joke.  </p>
<p>How do you like the economy now?  Just because Clinton isn&#8217;t in office doesn&#8217;t mean he didn&#8217;t start the train down the mountain, and yes, Bush continued it, guilty party #2, but he&#8217;s not mentioned in your article – neither is the big picture.  Taxes are a small piece of the pie here – Social Security and Medicare are the 10,000lb elephants in the room.  And they need to be fixed.  Forget tax cuts, lets fix entitlements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RayAnselmo</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/12/07/tax-cuts-and-giveaways-wont-save-the-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1633</link>
		<dc:creator>RayAnselmo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 17:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/?p=568#comment-1633</guid>
		<description>I found myself wishing there was a way to cut up Obama&#039;s and Boehner&#039;s credit cards.

Well, there is, kind of -- it&#039;s called the 2012 elections.  Problem is, even if the incumbents are replaced, will their successors be any more fiscally responsible?  Many people thought Obama would be more responsible than W. ... not so far, he hasn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found myself wishing there was a way to cut up Obama&#8217;s and Boehner&#8217;s credit cards.</p>
<p>Well, there is, kind of &#8212; it&#8217;s called the 2012 elections.  Problem is, even if the incumbents are replaced, will their successors be any more fiscally responsible?  Many people thought Obama would be more responsible than W. &#8230; not so far, he hasn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
