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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (93670)	4/15/2003 12:39:54 PM
From: gamesmistress	Respond to of 281500

...The share paid by the richest 20 percent (incomes starting at $72,000) was 68 percent. Gosh, I'm in the richest 20% nationally. Here in NJ, however, I'm definitely working class. :-/

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (93670)	4/15/2003 12:56:45 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<The economic danger is suffocation under an excess of taxes, government subsidies and welfare programs. It's insidious because it creeps up slowly over time. Think Europe.>>> Think California, also. (g) Speaking of money, it seems to me that predictions of what GWB or politicians will do next and what our foreign policies may be are clearest when related to our economy. Our economy was the major thing under attack by the terrorists, and they really crushed the airline industry which is still hurting. We would lose business travel, vacation travel, resort business, and air transport of goods. Europe is stagnant for the reasons mentioned, Iraq can become a big trading partner. The war is creating jobs which will overcome our rising unemployment figures. WMD's provide a way for terrorists with small effort to disrupt our economy and trade so it is important to eliminate those, which is why Syria has risen to the top of the hit list, for some kind of action. It is the econmy, the flow of money to consumers and back to the producers that is the most important and which the government is concentrating on with tax cuts and rate cuts. The costs of doing that are high, but the losses by doing nothing would be far greater.The deficits and borrowings will be paid back with far cheaper dollars because the end result will be inflation. Our homes will be worth double what they are today, so everyone can feel rich, even if their social or financial position in society is unchanged or even decreased a bit on average.. Sig

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (93670)	4/15/2003 8:30:32 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

What a load of . . . . . You rank high among the rudest posters not simply on this thread, Hawk, but on SI. Bill and Mike (uw) and I are sitting around Ken's living room exchanging somewhat pointed funny lines about one another's politics and taxes, enjoying trying to find yet another one liner, and you slam through the door, stern face well to the front of the rest of you, insisting on an end to all good fellowship with the proclamation that your post is bigger than anyone else's post. Sounds about right for your posting style. The topic of US tax policy is well off topic for this thread, though not for friendly bantering as we three were doing. I could take your post seriously, perhaps post a Krugman and Al Hunt column back in your face. Particularly, since whoever the hell Samuelson is, Krugman has better credentials. And Hunt writes better prose. And that would fit the one up style you seem to think is the way to have conversations. But that's as pointless and unnecessarily inflammatory as your post. Or, I could dissect this writer's facts and proposals but anyone who thinks tax cuts are about political discipline, as he says in his final paragraph, anyone who thinks the rich pay too much and the poor too little, anyone who thinks that the present meager fare of support for social services needs to be cut further, is not only someone whose articles I see no reason to read unless they offer some unusually new information/insights (and this guy certainly doesn't) but represents points of views that need to lose the next election. Sayonara.