Bush's Tax Cuts...

I'm sick of the phraseology used to describe tax cuts, specifically of the Bush administration. Media use the word "cost" to describe revenue that won't be taken in as a result of the cuts. Here's an example from an AP story today: "Most of Bush's tax cuts expire in 2010. Extending them would cost $120 billion in 2011 and $1.2 trillion from 2012-2016." This is misleading though; "cost" is a loaded word that implies money that you have then spend. Consider if you are at the grocery store and choose not to buy a pack of gum. Did you just "cost" the grocery store a dollar? Of course not, they never had the dollar. A more appropriate and straight-forward (honest) way to phrase the AP excerpt would be: "Not extending the tax cuts would cost the American taxpayer $120 billion in 2011 and $1.2 trillion from 2012-2016."