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: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (545992)	2/27/2004 11:42:11 AM
From: DizzyG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Buddy... Works in the States. I see no reason why it couldn't for the Federal government --- or, at least provide much more fiscal discipline then our current sad state of affairs. Apparently you didn't read the article I posted about automatic stabilizers. I didn't make this up. If a balanced budget model is forced on the federal government, you are exposing the federal revenue stream to wild fluctuations caused by changes in the business cycle. This may be great on the upside, but is really ugly on the downside. Frankly, I do not want to have to worry about a LACK of funding for the Military or the CIA because of an unruly balanced budget amendment. However, I do agree that fiscal discipline is lacking. In essence, politicians spend way too much money. I'm assuming that's a jest. More of a bittersweet jest. If politicians would not spend so much on idiotic "pet" projects, we would have a cyclically balanced budget. Alas, too many hands are in the cookie jar. Diz-