Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Les H who wrote (22162)	8/5/1999 8:03:00 AM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Respond to of 99985

*OT* Les, how you call politely a scambag and a swindler with a PhD in economics?? Haim

To: Les H who wrote (22162)	8/5/1999 8:34:00 AM
From: HairBall	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 99985

Les Horowitz: Today we have got a budget surplus, we have got substantial reductions in the national debt, the prospect we will pay off our whole national debt some time in the next 15 years. I have posted on this before. I guess I must be stupid or something, because I just don't get it. The supposed budget surplus is to be approximately 1.25 trillion over the next 15 years. Clinton has already proposed "new" spending programs exceeding the above-mentioned surplus. Assuming there actually is the above surplus after spending more on new programs than the supposed surplus, how in the hell do these guys think they are going to pay off over 5.5 trillion (growing by the second) in debt? I do not want to turn this thread into another discussion about weather there is a surplus or not, but I can't believe this logic. Can someone tell me what I am not seeing? Regards, LG