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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (23685)	7/11/2000 11:25:12 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Actually, the contradictions are only apparent. When employment is high, there is a fear of having reached the limit of rapid expansion; there are still inflationary fears; and the is the fear that the Fed will tighten credit to counter inflationary pressures. A rise in unemployment may be interpreted as trimming payrolls and increasing efficiency. It depends on the spin........

To: jlallen who wrote (23685)	7/11/2000 11:25:35 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 769670

Actually, the contradictions are only apparent. When employment is high, there is a fear of having reached the limit of rapid expansion; there are still inflationary fears; and there is the fear that the Fed will tighten credit to counter inflationary pressures. A rise in unemployment may be interpreted as trimming payrolls and increasing efficiency. It depends on the spin........

To: jlallen who wrote (23685)	7/11/2000 12:47:55 PM
From: Bill	Respond to of 769670

The stock market seems to like gridlock. One party rule introduces uncertainty in monetary policy. Drastic changes spell investor capitulation. For example, if I had my way, I eliminate the IRS and implement a 15% VAT on all purchases. No income tax, no cap gains, no estate tax, no various and sundry other taxes, no need to file a tax return. Everyone is taxed on how much they consume, not how much they earn or how much they save. The market would not like this approach. Too radical. No "deductions" would cause harm to certain industries, like housing and banking. This would have a ripple effect throughout the economy, and by the time it was all absorbed by the market, we would potentially be at one-half today's levels. However, real growth would probably follow the shocking decline, so I maintain it's good policy if we have the stamina to swallow our medicine now.