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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (88304)	3/31/2001 5:47:40 PM
From: oldirtybastard	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

yeah, there are some nuts out there. This interview with our neighborhood crack fiend is pretty long but goes to show just how far out of his mind he really is: gilder.com Kudlow: Of course not, that is absurd. You can only believe that if you believe the 1980s never happened, tax cuts have no effect on the economy, and that even if you pay people more after tax to work, save, and invest they won't do it because they don't care about the money. You have to ignore not only the Clinton boom after 1997, but the fact that personal income tax receipts rose more than a third in the wake of the Reagan tax cuts. Plus decades of global evidence that GDP rises in the wake of tax cuts and falls after tax increases. The truth is--on a strictly back-of-the-envelope basis--tax revenues will probably rise by $300-$500 billion over ten years as a result of Bush's tax cut. A tax cut of these dimensions will boost GDP growth about half a point a year, to about four percent rather than three or three and a half. The growth is cumulative, of course, you know, compound interest, man's best friend. In a decade in which we start with a $10 trillion a year economy, and end with a $15 trillion a year economy that means hundreds of billions of extra revenue. Of course these models going out a decade tend to be nonsense anyway, another reason their $1.6 trillion number is ridiculous. The real point is that if you strengthen incentives to work and invest, the economy will grow, and growth trumps everything. We should target four percent annual growth minimum because that's what we have done except when we have depressed incentive with high taxes and inflation. If you add the effect of new technology on productivity you are looking at five percent. That is where I think this is going. With five percent you're going to see a massive recovery of the NASDAQ. The mix of companies will change. But the bandwidth revolution will come and the Internet will take over economic life. The companies that lead that change will lead the NASDAQ to 10,000. TAS: In this decade? Kudlow: By 2010 it should reach 10,000. The Dow Jones--which is really an old-economy value index--should keep rising, because the old dogs are learning new tricks. TAS: The NASDAQ at 10,000 will please my wife. But what about my mother? Where do you expect the Dow to be at the end of the decade? Kudlow: I've been on the record for 35,000 for awhile. TAS: The world has changed. Kudlow: And it is not going back. That's not the way history works. Voters in free countries will keep driving their politicians toward a prosperity model. You're seeing it in Germany, England, Italy, South America. Once you get a taste you want more. They're getting a taste of freedom in China. They'll never go back. We're unwinding the -isms of the twentieth century, which blocked progress in major parts of the world. Fascism, communism, socialism: it's all unraveling. Through much pain in the twentieth century, we have learned what works. The human expense was staggering. But we learned and history will keep pushing us in the right direction. and it looks like he just changed drugs to something more interesting -g-: The church part is what I liked, the actual Mass. I liked the robes, the smoke. I loved it. All these rituals and rules. I began to realize that for the past eight or ten years I had been living without them. I was the rule. I was so self-centered. I'd just do whatever I felt like. I was in my master-of-the-universe period. You can't live that way. Nobody can. I knew it wasn't good and the drugs and the booze were part of it.