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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: foundation who wrote (91111)	1/3/2001 2:15:52 PM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Nah! W jawboned Greenspan into the dramatic interest rate reduction as a trade-off. W can now downsize his major tax reduction campaign promise and still look good. All he has to do is let the world know that Greenspan is in his camp. But he has to use the utmost discretion in making this fact known. Now a smaller tax cut will look good since it is interest rate related.

To: foundation who wrote (91111)	1/3/2001 9:29:19 PM
From: cfoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

OT It's suddenly allot harder to sell his (fundamentally damaging but politically expedient) tax plan. I beg to differ on two points, to wit: The rate cuts make a tax cut easier to sell because they underscore that economy is tanking!, not just slowing. In fact, the rate cut raises the credibility of GW, Cheney and Lindsey in that they were warning that the economy was entering a danger zone while the Clinton folks (not to blame them for the slowdown, as this slowdown was all the Fed's doing - rightly or wrongly) were up till today singing a happy tune. Tax cuts are not "dangerous". There is nothing dangerous about giving money back to the people who earned it. to consider it "dangerous" lives in the same domain as those who think it is the government's money. It is our money! (By the way, for anyone who thinks that the Reagan tax cuts, which pulled us out of a long no-growth, high-inflation period, were in anyway the cause of the high deficits, I can point you to the figures to disprove this myth, no falsehood.) jmho.