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 : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1874)	1/8/2002 1:30:20 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 15516

Mediocrity - our secret weapon. slate.msn.com

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1874)	1/8/2002 5:00:15 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 15516

Bush's owes his position and wealth in life solely to his family name. Surely, only the naive would have expected a rich kid who barely graduated from college to think about a budget, and worry over future debt and the consequences of a major recession and disaster like 9/11. W has been rich all his life, unlike the average American, who has to worry, "how am I going to make ends meet?" Well, empty-headed W stole our surplus. Various journalists and politicians warned us last summer, well b4 9/11, that the country would end up in debt. and that the social security surplus would disappear.

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1874)	1/8/2002 5:02:34 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

Deficit Politics Returns " Mr. Bush has access to the same information everyone else does, but instead of making plans for a graceful retreat he seems determined to box himself into a hard-right scenario of continuing to cut taxes, mainly for the WEALTHY, at a time when more and more poor and middle-class Americans are finding themselves out of work." New York Times Editorial January 8, 2002 New York Times Editorial It did not take long after the New Year for President Bush and the Democrats to resume their squabbling over taxes and the federal budget. Unfortunately, their arguments have been covered with so much political padding that the country can hardly be expected to follow them. The tax cuts of 2001 have left the federal government ill equipped to deal with the demands of fighting both terrorism and a domestic recession. Congress scheduled most of the cuts to take place a few years from now. Projections by both the Democratic and Republican Congressional budget staffs suggest that unless at least some of them are derailed, the nation will plunge more deeply into debt or be forced to cut critical programs. Mr. Bush has access to the same information everyone else does, but instead of making plans for a graceful retreat he seems determined to box himself into a hard-right scenario of continuing to cut taxes, mainly for the wealthy, at a time when more and more poor and middle-class Americans are finding themselves out of work. Mr. Bush's behavior has been very much governed by his desire as chief executive to avoid the mistakes that cost his father a second term. The first President Bush, of course, vowed to oppose new taxes in his famous "read my lips" speech. Later, in a genuine act of bipartisanship, he went along with a compromise with Democrats to lower the deficit with a package of spending cuts and tax increases. The younger Mr. Bush has always drawn the wrong lesson from this story. He has told innumerable people that he will not make his father's mistake of provoking the wrath of the right wing. But the elder President Bush's mistake was not in agreeing to tax increases that helped set the stage for the big recovery of the 1990's - it was making the reckless no-new-taxes promise in the first place. The public did not punish him for raising taxes but for breaking his word. On the Democrats' side, the Senate majority leader, Tom Daschle, is on the attack himself, attempting to convince the country that last year's tax cuts were a prime cause of the current recession and budget deficit. Attentive listeners might presume that Mr. Daschle would want to see those destructive cuts repealed, but he has so far remained coyly silent. He is said by aides to be undertaking a slow path to an eventual confrontation with the currently popular president. That may make sense politically. But Mr. Daschle needs to start preparing the public for that moment by speaking out about the tough choices posed by the budget. Neither the president nor Congress has any easy solutions to these problems. Both sides only face some difficult choices. It would be best if they started talking about them candidly. nytimes.com