[IgorPartola]

If I lend you a chainsaw today, and tell you that I'll need it back tomorrow that's temporary. If I come to collect it tomorrow, you cannot tell me that I'm taking something that you own away from you.

If you were thinking of those tax cuts as permanent, why didn't you and your representatives make them permanent ahead of time?

[anonymoushn]

If they were permanent, the CBO would have to make projections assuming they are permanent. It's much easier for me to borrow your chainsaw every day than to ask you to give it to me, because then I can tell you you'll have it back tomorrow.

As it is, the CBO is able to make projections involving the cuts expiring next year each year for over a decade now. This time the projection turned out to be more correct than usual, which is to say still wrong.

[IgorPartola]

Right. If you ask me every day for my chainsaw and I give it to you, and one day I decide that I need it and you cannot use it, it's your issue that you can't get your project done. Your projection was wrong.

Now, if you had reason to believe (say, a contract) that my chainsaw will be available to you every day for three years, yes you can count on it. Otherwise you cannot.

Perhaps we shouldn't have "temporary" tax cuts at all. Why is it that something that was good 10 years ago is all of a sudden not good now? It's not like the "permanent" tax cuts or hikes are really permanent: the government can revise the tax code fairly frequently.