Maybe columnist Bob Herbert is trying to leave NYT and get a job at the administration:
If anything, the stimulus package is not large enough. Less than 24 hours after Mr. Boehner’s televised exercise in obstructionism, the heavy-equipment company Caterpillar announced that it was cutting 20,000 jobs, Sprint Nextel said it was eliminating 8,000, and Home Depot 7,000.
Calling Rep. Boehner’s comments on TV an “exercise in obstructionism” is nonsense. He’s done what other Democrats have done in the past coming out swinging against Bush and his policies. Just think about all the public criticism from Democrats about the Iraq war and unfounded accusations against our troops. And what about when Republicans raised a red flag about Fannie and Freddie? The list goes on…
Nobody is disputing the fact that job cuts are painful and detrimental to the middle class. Companies have to downsize in order to adjust to the economic meltdown. Also, consumers have to spend less. The big part of the proposed stimulus package is for the government to spend its way out of the recession. If that doesn’t sound like crazy talk, I don’t know what does.
Sure, the government can create jobs with infrastructure projects. These workers get paid by the government — wait, by the taxpayers — to build bridges, offer government services, etc. Then they get taxed on the income. So really, why not just have these workers pay themselves?
That’s why tax cuts make sense. Let workers keep more of their hard-earned dollars. Let them decide how to spend that money, be it savings or buying or starting a new business.
Now do you see the stark contrast in methods? Critics like Herbert think tax cuts only benefit the wealthy, but in reality tax cuts benefit everyone except in different degrees. Allow me to ask this: Have you ever gotten a job from a poor person? I know I haven’t.
Herbert, of course, thinks that the government should provide all employment.
