SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Don Troppmann who wrote (34266)10/6/2000 10:54:28 PM
From: Paul Fiondella  Read Replies (1) of 42771
 
Bush and Social Security

"the federal government certainly is willing, to usurp money intended for Social Security and divert it to the general government usage. Doesn't that strike you as dishonest to the people currently paying into the SS system?"

Yes. But is it any different to take what working people pay into Social Security and give that money as a tax-cut to Mr. Nelson and those in the top 1% of incomes as an income tax cut, as George Bush would do?

That is precisely the Bush plan. It will give a huge tax cut to those in Mr. Nelson's tax bracket. It will then use the Social Security surplus created by worker payroll deductions to cover this enormous deficit and prevent it from turning into further burdensome Federal Debt. And incidentally the Federal budget will go back into the red.

Years down the pike when that 1.3 trillion in tax cuts is needed to pay out to Social security recipients, it will not be there. Are you in favor of raising taxes at that point or letting Social security go bankrupt?

That to me is the crux of my problem with George Bush and his lack of credibility. And if my economic analysis of Bush's plan isn't convincing enough, I recommend Paul Krugman's in the NYT.

************

I wish it was a simple choice between the big government candidate and the fiscally responsible candidate but that isn't this election.

Gore has a much better command of the realities of Washington than Bush and is far more qualified to be President. Bush would have been an excellent VP candidate but he just doesn't have the depth of experience to be a President.

And as for Reagan, he was the last great proponent of Keynesian economics --- often referred to as military Keynesianism. Reagan was Mr. Big Government himself and the debt he left behind is a burden upon generations of taxpayers.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News