We've been trying this "trickle-down" stuff for 6 years now. The national debt has skyrocketed, and the gap between the rich and poor has expanded. The problem with "trickle-down" economics is that those on top have too many ways to keep the wealth from trickling down. I don't think it's worth continuing to drain the national treasury and pick the pockets of our children and grandchildren to promote economic "growth" that mainly benefits the wealthy.

Here is something Mike D. and I can agree on. "Trickle Down" hasn't worked and won't.

"A rising tide lifts all boats." JFK was one of the first to employ this expression to "combat criticisms that his tax cuts would benefit mostly wealthy individuals." (Those were the days, when Demos actually thought about economic policy).

BTW, Mike, next time you need a job, be sure and ask a poor or homeless person for one. They would be so glad to accommodate your need out of their abundance!

Your economic theory is straight out of Karl Marx, much like every other Demo and most of the GOP.

We've had 6 years of this "rising tide" now to study the effects. The wealthiest 1% to 5% percent have gotten significantly richer, while median wages for non-professional people have been stagnant at best (as they have been for the last 30 years or so).

So this rising tide is lifting the yachts, but the rowboats and rafts are getting swamped.

(By the way, your second paragraph is a total non-sequitur. Care to explain what the heck you're talking about?)

Mike: Capital (wealth assisting production) provides employment; those without wealth don't. I guess sarcasm is wasted on some!

No, sarcasm is not lost on me, but good sarcasm has a basis in reality. It may be true that capitalism creates wealth. It doesn't follow that putting the nation into debt to give more to the wealthiest 5% creates more wealth. If that were true we'd be seeing poverty declining now, instead of growing.

Since you are so worried about my employment situation, let me reassure you that my job is secure, even though my employers are far from that top tier of wealthiest Americans who benefitted most from Bush's tax cuts.

bush sr. called it "voodoo economics" in the presidental primary debates, back in 1979. the trickle down has meant neglect of our countries' infrastructure, while the very rich have been sheltering their money offshore to avoid paying tax on it...ken lay had over 600 accounts, mostly in the cayman islands, perfectly legal,but let's not confuse these folks with patriots, or "employers". they are the ones WRITING the tax codes, and are a dominating influence at the various comittees in d.c. that oversee tax legistration.....and then there's military spending, i think eisenhauer said it best in his farewell state of the union address, (google it)...maybe the last honest president.

Well, if all the "very rich" have sheltered their money in offshore accounts to avoid taxes, then they aren't getting any tax cuts from their sheltered riches are they? Since this blog seems to be about whether the tax cuts should be extended, I vote that we stick to the topic rather than get side tracked on the evil rich who don't pay their taxes at all.

Why is the economy chugging along despite war, disasters, financial scandals. What is the secret blog breaths? Tax cuts across the board. I am middle class and I have experienced the tax relief and the filthy rich that pay me for my services have too, not to mention the poor who have seen their taxes all but eliminated. You can not tax yourself into prosperity and no matter what y'all say the tax cuts have worked -- "The proof is in the tasting of the Pudding". Spending is the problem.

I'm solidly middle class, and have benefitted from the tax cuts, too, to the tune of a few hundred dollars. But the fact remains that the vast majority of the cuts have benefitted the very wealthy, while the national debt has spiraled upwards. The fact that the economy still "chugs along" is testament to the overall strength of the economy. But we can't keep on charging up the national credit card indefinitely. Sooner or later we are going to have to pay the piper. It seems pretty selfish to me to just pass that debt along to our children so we can enjoy a tax cut now.

As for "taxing ourselves into prosperity," Kennedy's tax cuts (often referred to by the right) were a reduction of the high tax rates imposed by the Truman and Eisenhower administrations to pay off the debt from WWII. The tax cuts worked because the national debt was largely paid off, and the government didn't have to borrow to make up for the lost revenue. Cutting taxes while increasing spending, as Bush has done, is sheer madness. Likewise, it's probably unprecedented in U.S. history to cut taxes while fighting a war. Usually taxes are raised to pay for the war.

Whoever succeeds Bush is going to have a major mess on his or her hands to clean up.

spending IS the problem, and u.s.a. military spending is the big-ticket item...what's the terror alert level?