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 : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (14065)	5/10/2001 9:52:24 AM
From: nasdaqian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

i don't consider what you said to counter what i said at all. you just added information. let's say joe 6 packs tax cut is $100. how big will the inflationary component be in order to reduce joe's purchasing power? not big at all. of course, steve forbes has no worries. the $10s of millions he'll save will more than offset any "inflationary component." I think you just proved that joe should hope for a tax increase, whereby his purchasing power will go up! Seems to me taxes going into the gov. don't just fall into a hole. It is spent also, just somewhere else. Nullifying your supposed inflationary affect caused by a tax cut.

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (14065)	5/10/2001 10:41:50 AM
From: Follies	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

Skeeter, I never understood what is fair about the governent stealing from one person to give to someone else, but maybe you can answer this simple question. John works 40 hours a week and makes $50k a year, Mary works two jobs for a total of 80 hours a week and $100k. Why should Mary pay more than twice as much tax as John? I can't even understand why she shouldn't pay the same as John, or maybe even less than John because she is obviously more productive and the greater good of society benefits from her actions. Should someone be rewarded for working harder? Dale