Columnist Peter Callaghan makes an excellent point (TNT, 2-21) in asking that we listen to economists rather than politicians on the tax increase/spending cut question. And The News Tribune thoughtfully provided a prompt follow-up from economist Katie Baird (Viewpoint, 3-9).
Possibly, Baird is even right that deeper cuts in spending on education would be “the worst option.” But if so, could not The News Tribune have got that opinion from someone other than a professor at the University of Washington Tacoma?
Baird’s obvious bias and personal interest in advancing her position doesn’t mean it is necessarily wrong, but it certainly calls into question whether this opinion is based on sound economics or just personal greed.
Her more general point – that tax increases are preferable to spending cuts – would carry more weight if she were not a public employee and thus a direct beneficiary of the public policy for which she advocates.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.