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: Lane3 who wrote (5223)	11/8/2000 10:47:59 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

If you cut payroll taxes now and divert that money to IRA's, that's fine, but you've got to legislate your future cut in benefits as part of the same package or the numbers don't add up. Well, what I'm hoping for, under the impression that will occur is that the economy will grow out of its current debt and to such an extent that it can manage to pay out future benefits without extreme deficit spending. However, Gore was talking about spending TRILLIONS on NEW entitlement programs that would have to be funded right alongside the already projected unfunded liabilities from social security. And giving people the chance to invest their own money, if only in bonds, they will still reap a better return than the 2% that is projected to result from SS. Effectively what the surplus also does is SUCK money out of the private economy, allocating it to larger government budgets where it will likely be spent in the most inefficient manner. That's 2 trillion dollars over ten years that goes to increasing the size of government, the national debt, and limiting the amount of capital available to the private sector (where private citizens could save it or pay off their own personal debts). It's a triple whammy... Regards, Ron