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: Skeeter Bug who wrote (13936)	9/24/2003 8:41:51 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Remember my statement was in response to Elroy, who made the assertion the Bush’s plan is destroying the National Capital. The only point I was making was that a transfer of wealth, which I don’t think is occurring, isn’t going to destroy the national wealth. Further reducing taxes without cutting spending will not be stimulative. These points are not controversial and they are not just my opinion. Part of Bush’s plan can be stimulative if people have the conviction, the expectation, that these tax cuts are permanent (and that spending will have to decrease commensurate with the new tax base). I don’t think anyone is counting on that though. I think most people fear that taxes will be rising soon no matter who becomes the next president. The behavior of interest rates and investment spending are consistent with this prospect. That a real redistribution of wealth causes disruptions and pain is self-evident - I’m not sure why you are so insistent that I acknowledge this. There is a leptokurtosis/Pareto distribution of wealth in this country – if suddenly this wealth was redistributed evenly at some point and no other structural changes were made, you’d observe that very quickly the leptokurtosis/Pareto distribution would reassert itself.