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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (130197)	1/1/2001 10:52:26 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575797

Actually it is money put into the economy, it doesn't really matter how it is spent. The only difference is if the money winds up overseas, and even that has some benefit because it stimulates the world economy. Comb, That's what I meant when I said dollar for a dollar...a lot of the defense $$$ is paid to foreign component manu., and are lost to the American economy. Even when American companies are awarded contracts, the work is done overseas. But rather than getting into all that...I might point out that it was said back in the early 90's that the cuts in defense spending would significantly compromise the American economy and lead to a serious recession, if not depression. As it turned out, the economies of certain cities in the country were hurt but the overall economy managed to regroup fairly quickly. One of the great conclusions resulting from the defense cuts is that our national economy has become much less dependent on the war machine for its success, and many of those cities that had bases and/or defense plants closed have found alternative uses for those facilities and are thriving. I would hate to return to those days when defense spending drove the economy. ted

To: combjelly who wrote (130197)	1/2/2001 7:38:04 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575797

I have felt for a long time that the best stimulus for the economy is to randomly pick people amongst the taxpayers and send them a check for, oh $10,000 or so. The problem with that is it does not provide any additional incentive in the way a cut in marginal rates does. If you can keep more of the money you earn it provides some incentive to try and keep more. If less of your income and return on investment is taxed you have more incentive just to go for the most efficient investments and less to go for tax avoidance schemes. Also if you make taxes lower and simpler you save resources that would have gone towards tax compliance costs. Randomly sending out checks has none of those benefits. Tim