<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>Alan Greenspan Wants the Tax Cuts to Expire: Why Should Anyone Care?</title>
		<description>Comments for Alan Greenspan Wants the Tax Cuts to Expire: Why Should Anyone Care? at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.cepr.net</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 00:55:40 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>curzio</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/alan-greenspan-wants-the-tax-cuts-to-expire-why-should-anyone-care#comment-1579</link>
			<description>As I recall, Greenspan in his memoirs or speaking somewhere was soon horrified by what had happenned. The deficits, Bushes response to the war to just go out and spend quickly brought Alan around. And then again maybe I'm having a Seifeld momement. - malaparte</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 17:29:01 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/alan-greenspan-wants-the-tax-cuts-to-expire-why-should-anyone-care#comment-1561</link>
			<description>Ask geekspeak how far the stock market (where all his friends are) has to fall before he changes his mind. - Fed Up</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2010 11:30:33 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/alan-greenspan-wants-the-tax-cuts-to-expire-why-should-anyone-care#comment-1531</link>
			<description>Gee Mr Greenspan, we know you wanted to limit how fast the government could pay off its debt so it wouldn't have a surplus to spend, but to engineer a massive collapse of the economy with tens of trillions in losses to achieve that destroyed the village in order to save it.  It must be gratifying to know there won't be a surplus to worry about for a long time.  

Funny how you would know how the government would spend a surplus while claiming that it's not possible to predict regulatory risks, therefore no regulation is better than some regulation, then after the collapse, claiming no one could have known.  Any relation to Rumsfeld? - izzatzo</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:57:44 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
