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: Oeconomicus who wrote (157244)	5/18/2003 12:43:41 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

You original statement is wrong in two ways - 1) in that it implies a short-term injection of cash into the hands of everyone does more to stimulate the economy than any other alternative, i can't be wrong in what i didn't say. i compared it to one specific example and you distort that to "than any other alternative." that's not reasonable nor rational. and 2) in that it claims the only alternative is to put the money "in the hand of some clown who will save or invest it." i didn't claim that either. that's what bush wants to do with most of the tax relief. my ONLY claim is that, compared to bush's plan only, it would be better to give the same money he wants to give to the elite wealthy to folks who would actually spend it. in no way shape or form did i argue those are the only two alternatives nor did i argue the better of the two, imho, is the best opinion there is. let me repeat... in no way shape or form did i argue those are the only two alternatives nor did i argue the better of the two, imho, is the best opinion there is. #1 is not supported by historical evidence from broad tax rebates as were tried two years ago and in the 1970s. #2 is simply the creation of a false dilemma.