I'm sorry, but I really can not stand the guy. He is upset because giving tax breaks to the wealthy will not pay for itself? I think we all know that.
He is choosing to comment on a policy that will cost a couple of hundred million over a decade while ignoring the 600 BILLION in quantative easing that is about to kick in. The money will benefit the big banks, the ultra rich and hurt anybody who is on a fixed income or has savings- yet he chooses to ignore that (likely because those hurt are not among his friends, where those who will reap billions are in his inner circle.)
I read the article and just kept remembering that this is comming from the man, who in 2004 said "Not only have individual financial institutions become less vulnerable to shocks from underlying risk factors, but also the financial system as a whole has become more resilient." After screwing over the tax payer and telling politicians to look the other way and not glance at what has been (in part) responsible for a melt down that has cost trillions to date (all given to his banking friends) he is asking me to care what he has to say about tax breaks to the rich?
I am not saying that he is not right- the tax breaks will not pay for themselves, and possibly should not be extended. However, neither should the system that he has been a part of and run (unsuccessfully) for all of those years. Sort of like a magician saying look at my right hand so that my left can rob you blind... subtle misdirection at a time of 600 billion dollar bond purchases, and billion dollar campaign contributions to buy our politicians.
On a related note, if you read the idea behind the 600 billion is to bring inflation back, you may be interested in the remarks made in 1978 when Federal Reserve Board Member Henry C. Wallich addressed the graduating class at Fordham University. "Inflation," he informed the graduates, "is a means by which the strong can more effectively exploit the weak. The strategically positioned and well-organized can gain at the expense of the unorganized and aged."
Now you have this "great thinker" Greenspan ignoring the billions that are (in theory) about to be used to bring back inflation (by giving the money to his friends and associates) and suddenly worried about thi impact that a "tax cut" might have on America?