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: American Spirit who wrote (2629)	10/16/2000 12:02:34 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

You are correct about deficits during the Reagan Bush years. But the deficits would not have gone away if it was not for a REpublican congress. Why in hell's name would you want to go back to debt-financing a tax-cut mainly for the rich? I am for cutting taxes from part of the projected surplus. If those projections are too optimistic (or honestly even if they are not), I am for cutting government spending. I think we should continue to reduce the debt but not at the expense of tax cuts. As for the "mainly for the rich" argument, the reason why tax cuts benefit the rich more then the poor is because the rich pay more taxes. If the tax cut for the rich was so great that the poor would actually pay more taxes then you might have a point. Tim