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: Charles Tutt who wrote (285780)	8/11/2002 4:06:25 PM
From: Rick Slemmer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

Hi, Charles: Since a surplus implies to you that taxpayers should get "some of their own money back," I assume you would also take the position that a deficit implies taxpayers should be paying more? Yes, that's exactly right; and I would prefer that Election Day follow April 15th by a week or less. That would ensure some degree of fiscal responsibility on the part of Uncle Sam, no matter which party has the White House or Congress. I am firmly opposed to deficit spending, and I would imagine you are, too. Or would it have made some sense for taxpayers to pay down debt while they had the opportunity, rather than dissipate the surplus by handing it out to the wealthy? Charles, who do you think put the surplus money in the pot to begin with? Who exactly are "the wealthy," and what metric do you propose we use to define "wealth?" Rick Slemmer