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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jerome who wrote (43082)	3/5/2001 9:37:50 AM
From: daryll40	Respond to of 70976

Well, I do thank you for directly answering the question. So, at 40% federal and with state and local, you're basically saying top earners should pay half. I can argue with you as to why this is too much, but I am at least glad you came up with a number. As to the defense "pork" spending, that's what they said about Reagan's defense budgets. The ones who finally defeated the Russian bear. (versus the stock market bear!). 'Nuff said. Daryll40

To: Jerome who wrote (43082)	3/5/2001 9:48:59 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 70976

Jerome, Bush and the Republicans(and Rumsfeld) that want to spend hundreds of billions on a star wars missile defense plan that their own scientists say will not work and the Republicans admit they don't know who they will be defending against. Sounds like a lot of PORK for the Defense Department that no liberal wants any part of. I think we have finally found one thing we agree upon. The initiative, as proposed, would only defend us(and our allies) from ICBM's coming in from overseas; much of the threats we will face in the future will come from terrorists rendering the whole systems existence moot. In addition, it will only add to the distrust between nations. We should encourage nations to reduce their stockpiles; this certainly will not have that effect. BK