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: DMaA who wrote (289859)	8/23/2002 6:42:00 PM
From: Steve Dietrich	Respond to of 769670

I'm not sure i follow you. The treasury was struck with a tidal wave of revenue. I suppose you can attribute that to the fact that there was a cut in cap gains in '97. Since there was a large jump in cap gains revenue and since those underlying gains aren't considered as part of gdp, wasn't it highly disingenuous to harp that revenue as a percentage of gdp was going up and therefore we needed a tax cut? Reagan raised taxes in '82. Here's what Gingrich said about that: "Let me just say that in the Senate Finance Committee report, page 414 and 415, it says over five years it'll raise $228 billion dollars... I think that this clearly, though, would be the largest tax increase in a recession since Herbert Hoover in 1931 and 1932. I think it is a terrible thing to do; I think it will make the economy sicker, and I think to raise taxes without first having gotten every dime of spending cuts is fundamentally not conservative." Of course the economy got better though we ran huge deficits. Bush raised taxes. Clinton raised them again. Then we had a record expansion and actually eliminated deficits. So if there's any correlation between taxes, economic growth and tax revenue, it's the opposite of what you would have us believe. Steve