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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (436530)	7/31/2003 12:04:05 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Yes, he was forced to admit it by a question about the deficit. With more tax cuts to come in future years, the deficit will continue to soar. We will not see another budget deficit under $300 Billion. When the boomers hit the Social Security roles in 2012, the budget deficit will be a huge drag on the economy. Fiscal responsibility demands we reduce that deficit now. JLA, it is your generation who will pay for this - in spades.

To: jlallen who wrote (436530)	7/31/2003 12:13:16 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Back in the '80s, liberal Sovietologists swore that Reagan would strengthen the hand of Kremlin hardliners and make the Cold War much more dangerous. Instead, we got Gorbachev, a major peace offensive, glasnost, perestroika, and the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. Liberal economists swore that tax cuts would dry up credit, increase inflation, and, by the '90s, make us a nation of hamburger flippers. Instead, we had a big boom, inflation kept going down, and, by the '90s, we had an historically low unemployment rate with lots of decent jobs. When NAFTA passed, economists favorable to the labor movement predicted that it would devastate the US economy. In fact, it helped the economy somewhat, but not as much as supporters predicted, to be fair. When welfare reform passed, there were woeful predictions of people being tossed out on the street. In fact, welfare reform seems to have worked pretty well, and there has been no tidal wave of suffering as a result. When we invaded Afghanistan, and then again when we invaded Iraq, there were predictions by those opposed to the use of force that we were playing into the hands of the terrorists, who would unleash wave upon wave of strikes against us, as new recruits clammered to sacrifice themselves in attacking us. In fact, we have foiled all plots thus far, and there has not been a direct attack on US soil since 9/11. Why are we supposed to give special credence to these people? They may have a point sometimes, but they have been very fallible.......