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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ild who wrote (212795)	1/7/2003 1:48:29 PM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

true, but Bush is also ethically correct -- double taxation makes no sense -- it is "income control," not justified -- if they want a higher rate -- fine -- tax it at the corporate level. Cap gains taxes should be zero, as even silver-tongue has indicated in his speeches

To: ild who wrote (212795)	1/7/2003 2:29:59 PM
From: Oblomov	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

The Bush Administration shouldn't be marketing this as "economic stimulus", but rather economic security or economic sanity. Attempts at income redistribution only discourage production, and thus job creation and economic growth. But, they might help a politician to maintain a grip on power by generating resentment between the classes. Who cares if it comes at the expense of a few ppt. in GDP or a few million jobs? The rabble can't be allowed to become independent from the munificence of the state.