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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Currencies and the Global Capital Markets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (3007)	2/13/2001 1:10:30 PM
From: Robert Douglas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3536

Sam, Very nice post. I agree with much of what you said. I have never been a knee-jerk tax cutter myself. I supported raising rates in the 90's because I felt that debt was accumulating at too rapid a pace. But I do support lowering tax rates today because I feel that taxes are too high in relation to GDP. I dispute your characterization that the proposed cut is "gargantuan," indeed I think it is modest in its size. I think that now is an opportune time to cut taxes because the economy is slowing and the added stimulus will not be inflationary. I also believe that the recovery will not be as simple and rapid as many are hoping for. I think we are entering a long period of sluggish investment and moderating consumer spending. Slower growth than what we had the last 5 years is inevitable, IMO. If we have learned anything the last decade, it should be that these surplus/deficit numbers cannot be generated in a vacuum. They are very dependant on the growth of the economy. Remember, it wasn't long ago that deficits as far as the eye can see were being predicted. So it is very possible that a course of not cutting taxes may actually be the course that results in higher deficits. If we take care to maintain a healthy economy and be prudent in government spending, I think the deficits will take care of themselves.

To: Sam who wrote (3007)	2/13/2001 10:46:28 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 3536

siliconinvestor.com It's crap Sam.... Rubin is about as "fiscally conservative" as the congressional black caucus is inter-racial. The only thing about Rubin is that he was able to put on a better facade of conservatism. But the result is that rather than empowering people to save and hold hard assets for their retirement, he, and his former boss, have obligated our future taxpayers to foot the bill for social security and other entitlements. The government cannot be permitted to take in excess revenues to the extent that it currently is. Especially when those surplus funds are being placed in government debt, thus increasing future outstanding obligations, and taking the money and spending it on pork projects. And why I think the number is consider "magical" ($1.6 trillion), is because that amount will only represent 1% of total expected US GDP over the next 10 years. What's more important though Sam, is people having that surplus money they are currently paying out in taxes, to be available for the purchasing of REAL HARD ASSETS, not governmental obligations. People being able to take a percentage of their FICA tax to be placed in personal Roth IRAs, under govt supervision (like the Federal TSP program). People having the option of buying corporate bonds, mortgage securities, or even an index fund like the S&P500 that can be inherited by a family member should the person die before using that retirement up. That's conservative Sam... empowering the people to do for themselves, rather than depending on Uncle Sugar to take care of them. And I can guarantee you that such an influx of money into the private debt markets will do FAR MORE than increasing private government debt obligations to be paid by taxpayers 10-20 years from now. All that wasted time.... Now we're left to try and make up for the 8 years of misbegotten policy this former administration has left us. Regards, Ron