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.

Technology Stocks : George Gilder - Forbes ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: willcousa who wrote (5165)	10/30/2000 11:37:02 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5853

I have told you that the reinventing government was just a PR program attached to business as usual And you were wrong each time you said it. You may disagree with the types of people who are no longer employed by the government but it doesn't change the fact that the size of the government decreased even as the American population increased as did it's role in the world and the economy. TP

To: willcousa who wrote (5165)	10/31/2000 3:28:24 AM
From: tfrugal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5853

Willcousa, you have moved me to my very first post on SI, and of all things, politics. Too bad I was reading in the Gilder thread and not shrill diaper fillings..... First off this post and most of You-alls should not be here as this is silicon INVESTOR and off topic. Politically, I am neither extreme, but slightly right of center (voted for Reagan and Clinton) and have no comments on the candidates but rather some observations on your hype (as in hyperbole). Let's contrast "Bush" to "algore": selective capitalization ohh, just drips balance and evenhandedness. You speak of Gore's lies pertaining to love canal, love story, inventing the internet. Instead of reading off your talking points, some DD applied to the congressional record shows SOME truth to Gore's claims. Hyperbole is you. High tax rates? 39.6% is WAY less than the 90% or 70% top rates of the past, and only a couple points higher than the "golden age" of supply siders. That seems to slip your minds, or is it you didn't pay taxes way back then? If we slide capital gains lower, it will help me personally, but just how sound is it for the country? Why should I get taxed lower (or not at all) on stock gains than my employees wages? That being said, I do think the budget was balanced due to the events of '94, mainly "the revolution". However, there is still a huge deficit to deal with. Why do the conservatives want to spend ANY of the surplus on ANYTHING but deficit reduction? Sounds porkish to me. Clinton has been a better republican (via triangulation) than the elder Bush would have been imo. Co-opting his opponent's platform should have made you happy, but no compassion from the conservatives. This constant name calling and demonizing both you and the hard right do is not good for the country. I hope that history doesn't repeat itself as in "hail Caesar" Again, not pro democrat, pro USA.