tax cuts for wealthy?

As Cal Thomas, in a September 16 article, points ot, in arguing against extending the Bush-era tax cuts for "the wealthy," President Obama claims the government cannot afford to "borrow" the estimated $700 billion he says it will "cost government." For Thomas, the question is, What about the cost of tax increases for those earning the money? For Thomas, it is funny how the president does not mind borrowing money that has put us on a trajectory for a national debt exceeding $13 trillion.

The question ought not be why people making more than $250,000 a year ($125,000 if one is married and filing separately) should be allowed to keep more of the money they earn. The question is: why should people be required to surrender more of the money they earn to dysfunctional government, which misspends so much of it on unnecessary, outdated and failed programs?

The President tacitly assumes that the total amount of money the government now spends is appropriate, and therefore it should take more of the money the people earn, and especially, of course, those over $250,000. I would suggest that before we go down the road, the President defend this level of government spending.