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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JDN who wrote (40242)	3/11/2001 12:28:31 PM
From: saukriver	Respond to of 54805

I would like just ONE INTELLIGENT ANSWER as to why the fed'l govt cannot find it in themselves to belt tighten on spending rather than a trigger on tax cuts if revenues do not come in on budget? Why is it I must tighten my belt but Govt can just RAISE TAXES. You have two questions here. On the first, I don't think enough politicians would be enthusiastic about making cuts. So, regardless of whether budget cuts should happen, they will not. This is particularly true if the economy is stressed at the time revenue tails off. (I suspect that is the intelligent answer for you, but that is quite the reality.) On your second question why you have to tighten your belt while govt can simply raise taxes, I suspect the answer is that you do not have the power to tax others. I you could tax others, you would not need to tighten your belt. Anyway, Jacob Snyder's post reminding us that the govt made monetary policy worse when it enacted Smoot-Hawley struck a modern day chord with me.