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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (157075)	5/11/2003 2:44:32 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

<<vic, i don't even understand this comment. are you saying a hungry family won't buy food with extra money? how does recent history support this belief of yours? >> Recent history shows that despite massive consumer spending, the overall economy can still go into stagnanation. Since so many consumer goods are imported, this type of spending is not always the most beneficial for our economy. We also need business/industrial spending and cap-ex. This latter part of ht eequation is still missing. Besides, based on 300/yr per family, do you really think that an increase of less than $6 per week per family on things like gas and groceries will get this economy moving and create new jobs? Im not holding out much hope for this econ stimuls package. It's really more tax code revision that econ stimulus. But I will offer one lesson of history.. do you recall the 'luxury tax' that the Dems put through maybe 10 or 12 years ago? Things like pleasure boats and cars costing over $35 or $40k had a extra tax slapped on them.. all it did was put blue coller boat builders out of work, and sharply reduce sales of the high end autos. In fact i know of one boatyard near here that had to shut down altogether. Permanently. And guess what else took a hit. Tax revenues. After several years of this, the same Dems who put it in place repealed it.