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: TigerPaw who wrote (37839)	9/19/2000 12:54:37 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Well first, by definition a stimulus does not "rekindle" recession. Otherwise, it has not stimulated. Nor is there any reason to suppose that it will. On inflation: mostly, the monetarists have won. Unless the money supply is increased, there will be no inflation. The one situation where that might not be so is if there is a major increase in aggregate demand through increased government borrowing.(Stable borrowing would only stabilize aggregate demand). However, in this situation a tax cut would not increase aggregate demand, but prevent its precipitous decrease. That is the problem that the "retire the debt first" people do not see. A tax cut is not really a stimulus. Rapid tax retirement would be deflationary, and cause a recession. Tax retirement has to be gradual. There are two ways to accomplish that: use a large portion of the surplus for new spending initiatives, or rebate taxes. I favor the latter. I am not sure what to say about the "interest lost" point. Perhaps it will be as substantial as you say, in which case the plan deserves a technical adjustment. Perhaps you are misinformed. I will look into it, and see what I come up with....... On Laura, of course she would campaign more at this point. It is meaningless......