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: mitch-c who wrote (43682)	3/13/2001 8:32:56 PM
From: royco	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

OT RE: Why not start the problem with: Assume a 4% reduction in Federal spending? Instead, in the "Goldilocks" speech, Bush was more generous and allowed a 4% increase. (I understand the pragmatics behind that, but the concept still grinds my teeth.) Finally, I find your apparently serious use of the words "actual" and "future" as simultaneous modifiers of "surpluses" to be risible. Please tell us what the "actual future" close of the NASDAQ will be on Friday? Posing such an oxymoron as a precondition of tax cuts is begging the question. It fallaciously diverts the discussion to an artificially insoluble conundrum. - Mitch (@stayedawakeinlogicclass.edu) Mitch, Excellent points, and while we're at it, let's not forget that fedl. tax receipts from THOSE WHO PAY THEM rose 10% in the last qrtr of 2000, while income rose only 3%--See article in today's WSJ. The Democrats are suddenly such fiscal conservators, what a joke. The tax bite has hit all classes and these politicos can't stand to think that some of those revenues might not be there for them to spend, so they crow about deficit reduction. Too bad they didn't care about that for 40 some years. Hypocrite is too kind a term for their kind. Accelerate the tax cut and forget about 10 year projections. The tax drag on this economy must be ended, along with absurdly, relatively high interest rates SO THAT EVERYONE BENEFITS, especially those at the lower rungs who need to stay gainfully employed to support their families. W. will get what he wants and what the taxpayers deserve. Royco P.S. Still liking and holding AMAT for the long haul.