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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2414)	10/14/2000 11:53:57 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Let's take this back to the root of the issue... We have a surplus and some claim that we'll be able to pay the national debt down within 10 years. Yet, we have all of this SS money coming in that can't be invested in anything besides T-bills, or government debt. So while we're buying out foreign holders of our national debt using the surplus, that debt is not being retired since those surplus funds can only be invested in T-Bills, which is, in effect, debt that the govt has now issued to itself. Catching where I'm going yet? The question is... if I'm making more money than I'm spending, can I loan that surplus money to myself and pay myself interest for the right to do so? Or is this government interference in the private market or T-Bills? Again, just because they say we're paying down the national debt, logically they can't because ALL SURPLUS tax revenues have to be spent, or placed in T-Bills which leaves the govt paying interest to itself. Quite the quandary... and quite the case for Bush's private savings accounts. Regards, Ron

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2414)	10/14/2000 7:32:40 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 10042

An issue that is related to the discussion of defence spending: would a major tax cut combined with an increase in defence spending result is a return to deficit spending? The defence spending increases would be minor. A lot less then the cuts we have all ready made. So it basicly comes down to either new federal government programs or a tax cut. I would favor a tax cut because I want taxes to be lower and I am in favor of people making decisions about how more of there money is spent themselves rather then having the decisions made by the government, but even without this philisophical leaning a tax cut has the advantage in that while it is difficult politically to raise taxes if the surplus turns out to be smaller then we thought, it is much harder to eliminate programs. As you say yourself It is easy to talk about cutting spending elsewhere, but we have to remember that while everybody wants something cut, everybody wants that something to be somebody else's something. Each budget line has a constituency Any new government programs would have new constitencies. Cutting taxes is better for freedom and better for long term economic growth then new government programs. It is also safer in terms of avoiding future budget deficits. Tim