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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Street who wrote (4168)	9/20/2000 11:39:26 AM
From: Jim S	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13062

I see no difference between the two, except that Gore is a gun-grabber... Ahh, how can I count the ways... <g> Start with use of the money we currently overpay in taxes. One wants to spend it all in social entitlement programs that will never go away, but will just continue to balloon in the future; the other wants to cut back on how much we overpay, and thereby limit the unrestricted growth of government. You're part right, though, they both SAY they want to pay down the debt, one by creating new programs totalling about 1.5 times the current surplus, the other by restricting new spending to 1/4 of the surplus. The same conditions apply to other things, too, like medical programs. One says that by spending more money than the current "surpluses" provide, he will pay down the debt, while the other says that only a portion of the surplus will go to the new program and a real percentage will go to debt reduction. One thinks that the money should be spent willy-nilly, the other that people should take responsibility for their own future and care. One wants to continue to steal SS income to spend in the general budget, the other wants to make SS funds "sancrosact" again. One wants the gov't to control not only how much gets extorted from you, but also have total control over the politically inspired payouts; the other wants at least SOME of the SS inflow to belong to and be controlled by the people who pay the money into the system. Something that gripes me to no end about both of them is they talk about "paying out" for tax cuts. BS. Tax cuts lets us KEEP our money, not "get it back." Big philosophical difference. Like getting a "rebate" on a car versus just lowering the price. Rebates give total control to the recipient of the money, while price cuts give control to the payer. If you want to get into differences in their adherence to the Constitution, it goes far beyond just the 2nd Amendment. There will also be huge differences in treatment of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and probably the 9th and 10th amendments. One sees the Constitution as a crumpled old piece of paper, the other as a document to follow and to provide guidance in the operation of the government. We didn't get to where we are all at once, and we'll never be able to get to the point we should be. Best we can do, IMO, is make steps in the right direction. Browne is way ahead of his time. jim