Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (170088)	5/29/2003 2:32:39 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) of 1583851

as Mr. Bush signed the third-largest tax cut in history By some ways of counting it is the third biggest, but its still a very small cut. When did $330 billion become a small anything? And please don't come back with its only a small percentage of the total GDP......$330 billion is huge esp. when you can't afford it. Even the fact that it is only the third biggest shows that it isn't big. Because of inflation and because of the way government and our economy have grown only tax cuts in recent years have any chance of being considered the biggest when you measure by dollar amounts. This is the third biggest out of the last three tax cuts. Many tax cuts before that are a lot bigger in terms of how much the rate was cut, or in terms of percentage of GDP or percentage of tax revenue, but they are smaller in terms of total dollars because the dollars are worth less then they used to be and the economy is bigger then it used to be. The tax cut this year will probably be equal to about 1% of federal spending or .2% of the GDP. Its so tiny the main worry is that it will be too small to have any noticeable effect. It won't have a very noticeable effect because it will go into the pockets of the people it will benefit......period. The president is not calling his tax package the "Windfall for the Wealthy" act, which is what it is. He calls it the "Jobs and Growth" act, which is what it's not. It is a jobs and growth act and not really a windfall for the wealthy. Excuse my cynicism but how many jobs were created by the last tax cut that was not supposed to be for the wealthy but to stimulate the economy? while starving the government of the money needed to pay for essential services and to maintain a safety net for the nation's most vulnerable citizens. I've heard this again and again as federal spending has grown from $1tril a year to over $2tril, all the while both total and per capita spending grow faster then the inflation. But its okay......like you said, the overall GDP is so much bigger, what's a couple of trillion more in spending especially when its going to go to such good causes as toppling Saddam. And then, of course, there's the issue that its bad to spend money on Americans and their benefits but its okay to give it to the rich for pocket change or to the Iraqis so that they can have a good life or to HAL so they can clean up on the Iraqi oil industry. Excuse my cynicism but once again I find myself breaking down into sobs over the plight of the rich in this country. ted

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next