In the short run, yes. The stimulus performed as a wave of antibiotics, hence requiring extended tax cuts, investment and tax credits. Cuts to national defense or entitlement programs wouldn't be very bright right now (i.e.) adding fuel to the fire. Deficit spending doesn't look very sound to those who do not adhere to Keynesian theory, but when you have a massive financial crisis, economic downturn, deflationary levels and a scary geopolitical situation, it's absolutely necessary. That is essentially why I'm not arguing for tax increases in this market. Cuts could certainly be made across the board, that is a given. However, the cuts should be over the long run. David Cameron is attempting to move UK in the right direction, as should the President. Much of the Republican base doesn't want tax increases, yet have little solutions to pay for their dilemma. I heard one certain Senator babble around attempting to explain that Gov't revenue wasn't an issue as long as taxes stay low. Meanwhile the other side wants to boost taxes while increasing spending [Makes no sense, unless you live in smaller European nations, and I don't believe Americans want 60% rates and socialist states]. It seems apparent to me that the only manner in which the situation will change is if taxes are raised and cuts are made or if bush rates are extended with over the long haul -- extreme spending cuts. Of course it all comes down to the argument of whether lower taxes are really worth the risk of a revenue gap, and that is all philosophical. I just hope that Congress or the President doesn't use the recent downturns as an excuse to keep spending levels abnormally high.
