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: Scumbria who wrote (131064)	1/30/2001 1:26:38 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572033

Republicans love to do two-bit cuts in social programs, and offset those cuts with huge increases in military spending. Even two bit cuts in social programs are rare. Mostly they just grow and grow... Reagan did push through large increases in military spending but there where no large increases under Nixon, Ford, or Bush Sr. It is very unlikely there will be any huge increase caused by GW. Tim

To: Scumbria who wrote (131064)	1/30/2001 4:09:06 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572033

Dear Scumbria: It is you with a serious denial problem. Democrats spent $5 trillion more than they taxed for over 65 years. Cutting taxes, per Stockman, shrinks revenue but, tax receipts rose making his argument right in theory but, wrong in practice. Income was placed in low ROI tax shelters and when the net after tax income from the tax shelters became less than the after tax income in normal high ROI investments, tax collections rose due to much higher amount that could be taxed. Stockman may have believed that the US had not as much languishing in these tax shelters as there actually was which led to his incorrect predictions. However, the Democrats used up any raise in collections and then some by spending even more than needed (and calling that a cut because it was less than they wanted to spend (Republicans are as guilty of this trick as Democrats)). Perhaps a bill should be passed called the "truth in budgeting act of 2001" where any increase over the previous year (no inflation adjustment allowed) is called a hike and any decrease from previous year is called a cut. Yes, its obvious but, definitely calls a true cut, a cut while, the typical "cut", a hike but, below the rate of inflation. Pete