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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gpowell who wrote (13838)	9/22/2003 10:25:19 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

I have a degree in economics so I understood long ago that this voodoo you believe in was just a bunch of nonsense. Political hacks claim that cutting taxes will magically increase economic activity and thus supply the missing taxes. Grace A. Zaccardi has been waiting for more than twenty years for this magic voodoo to kick in after the Reagan tax cuts. It hasn't happened yet and it never will. Tax cuts do not increase wealth unless accompanied by spending cuts. None of your voodoo incantations will ever change this - no matter how many decades you wait in naive expectation.

To: gpowell who wrote (13838)	9/23/2003 8:24:49 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

you've got to admit there are more effective tax cuts to stimulate growth than a dividend tax cut. I mean really there are so many things wrong with rewarding dividend payouts as a form of growth stimulation you have to wonder what people were thinking. For one thing, we want to encourage capital to go to GROWTH companies, that is where job creation is, and dividends are a symptom of maturity. Plust the people likely to be interested in dividend paying stocks as investments are not typical demand stumulus types. etc.

To: gpowell who wrote (13838)	9/23/2003 12:52:41 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 306849

>>You most likely won't understand this but I'll try anyway. A deficit-financed cut in current taxes results in fully anticipated higher future taxes that have the same net present value as the initial cut. The net economic effect of deficit spending is equivalent to a spending through taxation.<< gp, i'm not interested in expectations b/c expectations are often selfishly motivated and wrong. it is clear we have had an over capacity problem in our economy. given that, how much sense does it make to give a TON of money back to the producers? will they create more capacity when we already have too much? that's an equation to lose money, not make it. the expectation to gain more money in taxes than dished ou in tax cuts is an irrational one given this tax policy and an overcapacity environment. the bad deficit numbers (very, very, very bad) are proving this daily. the tax cut money isn't yielding jack in returned taxes, as per the "expectations." that isn't to say that you are intrinsically wrong on this issue. there are some scenarios where you would be exactly right. i'm just arguing a national overcapacity environment is not one of them. an undercapacity environment seems to fit the bill for what you are arguing much better. the massive deficit spending just reinforces my belief system... and it should challenge yours.