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 (2710)	10/16/2000 4:38:07 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 10042

Until then lowering revenues with massive program cuts is reckless. And if programs are cut which ones are they going to be? Get rid of the EPA? Safety-net? Close more military bases? What? I think the EPA (and many other federal regulatory agencies) could be made smaller. All or at least almost all government subsides (which usually amount to corporate welfare) should be phased out, some military bases probably should be closed. The federal government should stick to its constitutional mandate, some of the functions it gives up could be taken over by the states (which unfortunately might require higher state taxes). But really the spending doesn't have to be decreased at all (although I think it should be). All we have to do is reign in the increases. If spending only grew at the rate of inflation the debt would be eaten away as federal revenue rises even with a tax cut. Tim