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: DizzyG who wrote (542100)	2/19/2004 12:09:02 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Respond to of 769668

Dizzy, let me correct a couple of misconceptions you seem to have concerning my "jobs" post. First, I never said that the Bush tax cuts "have not created jobs." I think that they have. What I did say was that we didn't get the most bang for our buck because they weren't tailored to MAXIMIZE job creation. I explained very clearly the kind of tax cuts that would have had a much more beneficial impact on joblessness. This isn't rocket science; it's basic economics. My second point is that you cannot claim that this recovery is primarily a tax cut recovery. There are some very powerful forces at work in the economy. Interest rates controlled by the fed have been cut to the lowest in decades and have been maintained at those levels for quite some time. The housing refinance and building boom and the increase in consumer credit have kept demand from falling through the floor and exert upward pressure on the economy. The level of Bush government SPENDING is huge, especially in terms of spending for the Iraq war. This spending stimulates the economy tremendously. In addition, not all of the tax cut went to those who could afford to save; part of it went to the spending income brackets and thus WAS designed to stimulate the economy quickly. In the longer run, however, that same huge level of government spending combined with the recent tax cuts will increase the deficits to the point where interest rates will rise. Guess what happens then? Finally, you maintain that the tax cuts did not cause an increase in the deficit. Do you understand that the deficit is the difference between the amount the government receives and the amount it spends? In deficit terms, decreasing receipts a dollar has the same effect as increasing spending a dollar. You may think that you "get to keep more" of what you earn with a "tax cut." The ugly truth, however, is that you will NOT get to keep more of what you've earned, you've simply deferred your share of paying the cost of government until a later date. What's really funny is that this "tax cut" was structured in such a way that when you do pay back the unfunded cost of this year's government, you'll be PAYING A GREATER PROPORTIONATE SHARE THAN UNDER THE OLD RATE because the "tax cut" shifted the burden from the very wealthy to the middle class. Who's your buddy now? Congratulations.