To: TimF who wrote (543 ) 11/15/2002 2:39:16 PM From: tejek Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7936 If tax cuts are what the public wants then I don't see being responsive to the desire of the people as pandering or in any way negative. Esp when tax cuts are normally a good idea. They are? This of course is a repeat but look no further than CA to see what tax cuts can do to a place. For a long time, the argument was made that tax cuts were responsible for major growth in CA.......then a wall was hit and CA learned that all the growth did was a mask a whole load of problems. Its the same with states that experience a ton of growth based on low taxes and a decent [weather] climate. They grow like mad, then hit a wall and find all kinds of problems behind the growth. Suddenly, they have to raise taxes to compensate or their quality of life deteriorates. Meanwhile states like MASS, WS, and MN where there are complaints about high taxes 24/7 but have a quality of life that can't be touched by places like AZ or CA or GA. Granted gov't should not be allowed to raise taxes indiscriminately but to place ridiculous limits on taxes only hurts the taxpayer in the end. Like with buying cars or any thing else, you get what you pay for! have you ever noticed that the people who complain most about taxes are the first to complain when public services are cut back after a round of tax cuts have been voted in? No, it doesn't seem to be that way at all. I guess you'll need to pay more attention.I have noticed however that when the electorate pushes hard to get tax cuts, that many in the government threaten very popular programs to hold off the tax cuts, rather then finding unpopular or marginal programs to cut or eliminate. Yup, its gross. We end up pitting everyone against each other........maybe its why there is so much anger and violence in the US. BTW have you seen "Bowling for Columbine" yet? ted