05-05-2011, 03:56 PM
Interesting op-ed in today's NYTimes.
I haven't had a chance to read his entire paper, so I don't have position on this, yet. I'm just putting it out there.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/opinio...sheadlines&emc=tha212
"REDUCING the budget deficit and stopping the explosion of our national debt will require more tax revenue as well as reduced government spending. But the need for more revenue needn’t mean higher tax rates.
As the bipartisan fiscal commission appointed by President Obama stressed last year, tax revenues can be increased substantially by limiting the deductions, credits and exclusions that are essentially government spending by another name."
Edit: Added quote excerpt
I haven't had a chance to read his entire paper, so I don't have position on this, yet. I'm just putting it out there.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/opinio...sheadlines&emc=tha212
"REDUCING the budget deficit and stopping the explosion of our national debt will require more tax revenue as well as reduced government spending. But the need for more revenue needn’t mean higher tax rates.
As the bipartisan fiscal commission appointed by President Obama stressed last year, tax revenues can be increased substantially by limiting the deductions, credits and exclusions that are essentially government spending by another name."
Edit: Added quote excerpt