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 (132012)	2/9/2001 12:53:57 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570519

Scumbria, More Geronimo nonsense. The first Rep budget didn't take effect until 1996, and the budget was balanced two years later. Half of the deficit was gone before they showed up. Twisting numbers again? Why is it that everytime you use some "fact" you get it wrong. And wrong favoring your point of view? It's like when you go to store, and you the cashier gives you wrong change. You may say, ok, he made a mistake. But when the cashier gives you change incorrectly 3 times, everytime favoring him, you begin to wonder. The deficit in first year prior to Clinton's budget was $255 billion, and the first 2 years of all Democrats in power, the largest tax increase in history (retroactive) and the deficit went down to $164. Reduction of $91 billion, or 35.6%, not half. The next 2 year of Republicans, saw $142 billion reduction in deficit, and the 2 years after that, we say $146 billion reduction - greater reduction in $$$ and %. These are budgets that include Social Security. Let's look at the deficits excluding Social Security surplus: Deficit Reduction for President Congress Deficit 2 years % from 93 93 Bush 41 Dem 172 94 Clnt 42 Dem 140 95 Clnt 42 Dem 138 34 19.7% 96 Clnt 42 Rep 93 97 Clnt 42 Rep 75 63 36.6% 98 Clnt 42 Rep 35 99 Clnt 42 Rep 2 73 42.4% Joe

To: Scumbria who wrote (132012)	2/9/2001 12:56:42 PM
From: pgerassi	Respond to of 1570519

Dear Scumbria: One should do what one says. You are not dealing with the present but still in the past. Clinton has shown his true colors. Even the Democrats in the House and Senate are saying he was either stupid (given the benefit of the doubt) or bribed (much more likely). Gore lost. Bush is now the President. You have yet to deal with these facts. All your pontificating about the budget, environment, debt, etc. is a smoke screen to the facts above. All you are doing now is sounding like a little brat who did not get his way. Well, you forgot to vote, so you said. You failed in your duty. People like you have no business bitching about the results of the election you failed to participate in. As to the debt. If I could be assured that any Congress could be trusted not to spend a penny of the surpluses that will be generated (and I do not trust either the Republicans or Democrats in this (the funds will be to tempting)), where spending is increased only at the rate of inflation (whether PPI, CPI, GDP deflator, or some other index tied to inflation), then and only then, would I prefer tax cuts to be delayed. I would prefer tax simplification and the closing of all corporate and private loopholes over tax rate cuts. I do not want automated triggers for tax cut recisions. Let them pass a tax hike. This is to reduce spending first and foremost (and that means entitlements too, if you include other spending in this like defense). Raising taxes should be painful. It should be the last resort, not the first. However, since I do not have any confidence in the safety in any large surplus to giveaways like what has happened in all past years (and Republicans are as guilty as the Democrats in these "emergency" (NOT!!!) pork barrel spending bills), I want tax cuts to be done first. If tax hikes are necessary later, they can pass them but, only after explaining why and the explanations better be good or it will be painful (big time) to them all. After all, its from my money, and yours, and every other taxpayer. What it is not, is theirs to do with as they please. Pete