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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (1768)	2/10/2001 11:30:21 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Lets say we differ in our opinion of what the USSC did:) Perhaps. We both know the decision of the USSC, I'm sure. And probably agree on that point of fact. I've read a good portion of the written opinion of the Court and I thought it was one of the poorest written opionions of any that I've read. I found the "due process" argument weak; as did many Constitutional authorities. As I've read the opinion of the Court it seemed quite clear that the Florida Supreme Court should never have allowed those overseas ballots to have counted. It was a violation of due process. I take it your "DC" refers to Federal budget as opposed to the District of Columbia. As you, I expect the size of the surplus to decrease irrespective of the tax cut. And I would think that we could agree that by past experience that we cannot accurately the surplus/deficit on this quarter, let alone 5 or 10 years out. Paying "too much taxes" seems to be a universal opinion. Whether we do or not is another matter. Narrow it down to one very specific item...Federal highway funds [arbitrary non-political choice on my part]. How much should we be spending, if we're not spending the right amount; should it be higher or lower? If you gathered together 10 people to figure out how much we should spend; how many of them would agree on every expenditure? Rhetorical questions. I've seen a couple of "tests" where a group of conservatives and liberals [overtaxed ones <s>] are thrown into a room for several days [with some knowledgable budget people] and asked to come up with a significantly reduced budget. All parties were inclined, though obviously there were different priorities. At the end of the exercise, they all come out saying the same thing. We couldn't cut very much, sic, not substantial. Perception becomes reality and economic optimism is low. It would be interesting to know why it is low. The effect has been a reduction in consumer spending. Interesting that we also know that consumer debt is at an all time high. So if confidence in the economy improves and we go at a negative savings rate, is that good? I do have to go out and do some errands, but I look forward to a continuation of the dialogue. [I was worried that you were slipping into the repetitious rhetoric of some of your conservative buds. It's reassuring that you haven't completely fallen into that hole <s>.] jttmab