Economists are raising their estimates for economic growth as a result of the tax-cut package

[dkf]

Part of the reason bonds are selling off is that investors now expect the tax package, which also includes an extension of unemployment benefits, to lead to better growth in the U.S. economy. That means less incentive to keep money parked in ultra-safe investments like Treasurys and also a greater likelihood of inflation, which would erode the value of the fixed payments from bonds.

Economists are already raising their estimates for economic growth as a result of the tax-cut package. Goldman Sachs economists released a rough estimate Wednesday saying that the tax relief could wind up adding between 0.5 and 1 percentage point to economic growth next year.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stocks-trade-flat-Treasurys-apf-2095603168.html?x=0

[louis-t]

1. And GS is ALWAYS right about EVERYTHING.

It's NOT "tax relief". It's extending something that's already there. These so-called "economists" need to put down the can of Red Bull and stop listening to Republicans.

[dkf]

2. Depends on if they were doing their estimates based on a lapse or not.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

3. Wall Street is not Main Street.

Economic growth does not equal job production.

And this flat out sucks:

"...and also a greater likelihood of inflation..."

[katnapped]

13. What's wrong with inflation?

The rich will get back that awwsum extension of UI benefits that Obama caved for.

[KansDem]

4. Didn't they do this when Reagan announced his plan for "trickle-down" economics?

I seem to recall that was the case...

[xchrom]

5. And the government will have to borrow more

To make up for the bigger hole in the deficit.

And it hurts individuals making 20gz or less and hurts families making 40gz and less.

[bbgrunt]

6. did they predict a drop in unemployment or a rise in wages?

[jtown1123]

7. This article fails to identify these nameless "economists" so I cannot take it seriously

just because the stock market is doing great, doesn't mean the vast majority of middle class peoplew will be rolling in the benjamins. If they actually interviewed a respected economist I recognize (i.e. Krugman) maybe I could believe this? Where was the vast prosperity under 8 years of Bush?

[soryang]

8. The tax credits are wasted in a bill with no tax increase

You need the carrot and the stick or you don't get the economic impact. The failure to subtantially change the tax structure which favors concentration of wealth upward to Wall Street financial interests rather than encouraging investment in tangible production capital is an ideological bias which dooms us politically and economically.

The second structural defect is the international militarism that the US ruling class has adopted whole cloth. It is aggravating a balance of payments crisis that is the cause of all other ills.

Where does the balance of payments crisis come from? It comes from blind ideological adherence to Chicago school flat earth nonsense about "free trade." This is the third leg of structural failure that goes not only uncorrected by the Obama administration but worsened. The average Chicago School wonk doesn't even know what free trade really is. Study Michael Hudson if you want to find out. No one in main stream media will interview him because he can pop their bubble of delusion in just a few minutes.

[Xicano]

9. Growth for the greedy, not for the needy.

[dkofos]

10. Leaving things the same will change nothing.

With the exception of income inequity.

The rich WILL get richer. MUCH RICHER

[Xolodno]

11. It was never a question if continuing the tax breaks would help...

...of all the options on the table, it was considered the least effective. If anything, continuing unemployment benefits is probably pushing the estimates further up. Of course they will spin this in favor of tax cuts.

[Bluebear]

12. Well, as long as Goldman Sachs is happy. nt