Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (746996)	8/4/2006 2:35:52 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

No, tax rates don't 'have to be paid for', but DEFICITS certainly do... one way or another! Yes the interest on the debt created by the deficits is a real cost. But that point isn't directly relevant to the application of the "PAYGO rules", its indirectly relevant because there would be no point in such rules if the debt was interest free, or could otherwise be ignored, but it doesn't change how you apply the rule. The rule would call for equivalent tax increases or spending decreases if you have a tax cut. However keeping the taxes at their current rates shouldn't qualify as a tax cut for those purposes. The rule is not a balanced budget rule, its a "don't increase the deficit" rule. Its potentially useful, but its usefulness is greatly weakened by the fact that it doesn't factor in entitlement spending. Entitlement spending doesn't have to be "paid for" in terms of those rules. It has to be paid for in reality but those rules didn't take that fact in to account. If your going to have rules like that they should include entitlement spending.