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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rich4eagle who wrote (141191)	4/28/2001 10:28:50 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

<<in those countries you call liveral, Didn't you just post about spelling errors?

To: rich4eagle who wrote (141191)	4/29/2001 10:55:45 AM
From: RON BL	Respond to of 769670

Rich Is it a liberal position that business gauging is bad but government gauging is good ? I am missing nothing. Unlike many zealots I look to examine things from both sides of the fence. I know that business will always seek to maximize profits. However if you notice it is always where there is little competition that business can max out. That is why we have the concept of the monopoly. If you notice that because we have mandated from both the state and federal level that no energy be built, then it stands to reason that we are allowing the companies to gauge us. Supply and demand. Go back a few years and look when the oil stocks were down and looked like tech stocks do now. GLM, MRL, NE go look at their charts. Everyone was calling them dead. But because we played into OPEC's hands they are now reversed and looking good. Lot's of demand and little supply. Rich also are you saying in one breath that oh my God 2$ a gallon is bad but if tomorrow we raised taxed by 3 dollars then oh that's ok ? ALso is it ok that government makes more than the oil companies when they do none of the work. Why aren't you screaming about that ? By the way do you think that our taxes are used wisely ? Question for you. Why is it that we ask, no demand, that business should make 20 to 30 % improvements in 2 to 3 years in reducing pollution and yet after 10 years of massive federal spending we have nothing to show for the education dollars. Wouldn't it be a logical assumption that if we can expect that business can make 20 to 30 % improvements that business should take over education ? Another question. DO you think that perhaps the possible solution going forwards with this country is to make a real change ? WHat I see as a possible and true bipartisan approach would be the following. We don't seek to end or eliminate programs that can help people rise from poverty (Republicans often aim at this). However we use business leaders who will guide these programs to make sure that the money raised in taxes is most efficiently spent. Thus if we are going to have a food stamp program we dont take in taxes that end up with 90 cents on the dollar going to administer the program. To me this would be an ideal solution. Continue with programs but stop the fraud and waste. Use technology to really stream line government and make it work for us not against us. Its very simple if we keep throwing people into the wagon no one can pull it up the hill. Government should be a lean mean fighting machine not a huge slug. Finally if you and I are going to talk it has to be rational and not just name calling. I know that you are a very intelligent person but if you are going to be fanatical we can go nowhere.