There is so much malarkey in today's New York Times editorial, A Tepid Fiscal Agreement, that I just don't know where to begin. Well, actually, I do know where to begin---with the first sentence. And I'll just leave it there for tonight, because the rest of it is going to take some real effort on my part, out of respect for your time, to counter with brevity.
Here's sentence one: "For the first time since President George W. Bush began the country’s long slide into debt by cutting taxes in 2001, an agreement was reached late Monday in the Senate to raise income taxes on the rich."
Here's a chart: The blue line is revenue, the red line is government spending. Notice the trajectory of revenue after Bush cut taxes in 2001. Notice the trajectory of spending from 2001 to current. I have no problem with laying substantial blame on the Bush Administration for the size of the debt, but I do have a problem with blaming it on tax cuts when tax revenue following those cuts rose at a record pace. Clearly, as the red line illustrates, the record pace of spending would explain our "country's long slide into debt".
Note: The two recent dips in revenue coincided with recessions. And no, cutting taxes---leaving capital in the private sector---does not cause recessions...