I might agree with the author's thesis that tax code changes are the cause of the "tech job meltdown" BUT they don't provide any evidence for their claims in the article :/ This makes it punditry, not a serious economic discussion.
When I see discussion of complex economic problems (e.g. housing...) that are probably complex and multifactorial, authors often want to claim they are monocausal. It's usually a bad sign if there are no charts, graphs, numbers or quotes from people (in a position to know the truth, e.g. execs setting hiring policy) to back up their claims.
When I see discussion of complex economic problems (e.g. housing...) that are probably complex and multifactorial, authors often want to claim they are monocausal. It's usually a bad sign if there are no charts, graphs, numbers or quotes from people (in a position to know the truth, e.g. execs setting hiring policy) to back up their claims.