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: Mr. Whist who wrote (258704)	5/26/2002 7:59:17 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

ENSLAVEMENT 101 flapjack, Re: "Let's send billions of dollars to special interests, the richest of the rich and to defense contractors and let our children and grandchildren figure out how to pay for it." The game that Bush cynically plays on behalf of his greedy banker buddies to entrap and enslave the youth of this nation before they even get a chance to vote. Good thing he's also working to dim down the education system so the suckers can't figure out they're being had. My wildest dream of the year was that George Bush was pushing education reform, insisting that high schoolers are not only taught Driver's Ed, but that they are taught Credit Card Ed. .......Then I woke up and realized how deluded I can be. -Ray

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (258704)	5/26/2002 8:44:26 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 769667

ANTHRAX ATTACKS, A GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY? Some may find these views worth considering, and worthy of alarmed concern: Quote: But we have to distinguish (DoD funded biowarfare research) from the anthrax attack on the government. Clearly this was a deliberate attack designed to shut down Congress, the House and the Senate, which they pretty much did, at a critical time. And it was by people affiliated with Pentagon, CIA. I do not believe that at all was any coincidence. -Law Professor Francis Boyle, University of Illinois counterpunch.org

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (258704)	5/26/2002 9:13:44 PM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 769667

res- If you wanna cut taxes, you gotta cut spending. Flap, remember the economic question I gave you a few weeks ago? The answer was not all tax cuts cause a reduction in revenue. So your black and white economic world really doesn't exist. Most tax cuts cause a reduction in revenue for the short term. Especially if they fail to stimulate the economy. Long term it depends on the type of tax cut, and the kind of economic environment it creates. If the tax cut stimulates new plant and equipment spending, the net result could be a positive revenue generation. That's largely what happened during the 80's when Reagan cut marginal tax rates from 72% to 36%. Tax revenue rose quite dramatically. Unfortunately, (led by Tip O'spendaholic Neil) Spending rose even faster. Today, the Democrats are just as anxious to raise spending. And sadly, we lack enough serious conservatives who are willing to take on the liberal Democrats and fight the spending binge. If you're seriously concerned about congressional spending and want to find out the facts regarding who the big spenders are in congress, there are a few resources around the net I'm sure you could locate. In summary, conservative politicians who want to limit spending are rarely joined by Democrats. The biggest spenders are almost always Democrats. But, what's worse is liberal Democrats demagogue the people who are concerned with fiscal sanity by saying things like "they want to starve children, starve the elderly, etc". This liberal strategy has worked to create the environment around which only the most ardent conservative will stand up and limit spending. Further, despite the Clinton administration's claim the budget was balanced in the last few years, it wasn't. The Clinton administration made it appear that annual spending did not exceed annual revenues? Mostly by using Social Security revenues to cover the difference, even though Social Security taxes are supposed to be held in a trust fund and not spent on other federal programs. Today, with time running out, Democrat Senate Leader Tom Daschle has yet to bring a budget resolution to the floor. The resolution is an important step in the budgetary process, because it provides overall guidelines for spending. Without the resolution, there are fewer constraints on the appropriations process, and more room for mischief when bills come to the floor. Dashle is now creating the environment for pork to flow again. And like the 190 billion dollar farm bill he recently rammed through congress, he's happy to spend and spend some more. Dashle is nothing more then today's Tip O'neil. He's creating the spendaholic environment which exists in Washington today. President Bush is focused on fighting the war effort and doing everything he can to keep congress from degenerating into divisive partisan bickering. So he's giving congress what they want in an effort to keep congress united. Here's some news it appears you missed. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: FIRST QUARTER 2002 (PRELIMINARY) CORPORATE PROFITS: FIRST QUARTER 2002 bea.doc.gov Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 5.6 percent in the first quarter of 2002, according to preliminary estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter, real GDP increased 1.7 percent. The GDP estimates released today are based on more complete source data than were available for the advance estimates issued last month. In the advance estimates, the increase in real GDP was 5.8 percent (see "Revisions" on page 3). The major contributors to the increase in real GDP in the first quarter were: Private inventory investment, personal consumption expenditures (PCE), government spending, residential fixed investment, and exports. The contributions of these components were partly offset by a decrease in nonresidential structures. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased. The acceleration in real GDP growth in the first quarter primarily reflected upturns in private inventory investment, in exports, and in residential fixed investment and smaller decreases in nonresidential structures and in equipment and software that were partly offset by accelerations in PCE and in state and local government spending. There was a sharp upturn in imports in the first quarter.