Does anyone beside me find it incredibly disengenous that we are having an argument (dabate) in congress on how long we should keep the "Bush Tax Cuts"?
Please... someone tell me why these cuts are not permanent, thus requiring Congress to vote to actually Raise Taxes if they have the guts to try at some point in the future. It is ridiculous to argue how long a tax cut should last. The only "sunset" provision that should exist is on a tax hike, not a tax cut!
In fact, the best policy would be to have all fees and taxes subject to a sunset provision so that our elected officials would have to justify any reauthorization on each and every fee and tax. We seem to always think that an increase or new fee or tax will somehow be temporary... they never will be unless they have an automatic sunset provision.
For business and individuals to have the confidence to move forward with creating jobs and investing, we need an environment where we have a more predictable tax policy. Putting time limits on tax cuts does no such thing... it simply creates more uncertaintity.
I understand the point of the extension of unemployment benefits in this negotiation, but if you are going to push for a principled agreement, do not sunset cuts, make them permanent. This makes everyone accountable, especially when there is a desire to increase taxes...
No more phony "expiration" of cuts to get a tax increase without a vote.