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 (551880)	3/15/2004 11:33:38 AM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

ROFLMAO!!! John Kerry: WE WILL TAX YOU INTO PROSPERITY!!! Patsy Mckee: DUUUUHHHH, geeeeee. Nobody ever thought of THAT before...

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (551880)	3/15/2004 11:55:35 AM
From: DOUG H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

In 1964, federal taxation as a share of the economy stood at 17.5 percent, while unemployment was at 5.2 percent. In contrast, the U.S. total tax burden is 30.6 percent....in 2001, the unemployment rate rose, from 4.7 to 5.8 percent Great point Buddy. Paying MORE in taxes does virtually NOTHING to change employment. So why do it?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (551880)	3/15/2004 1:44:46 PM
From: Peter O'Brien	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Clinton also cut taxes. - capital gains taxes. - raised the exemption on personal residences so their sale is tax-free to most people.

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (551880)	3/15/2004 10:17:36 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Buddy, Once unemployment reaches pre recessionary-levels, I am not opposed to examining the prospect of raising Federal Taxes to pre-recessionary levels. So I don't want you to take this as an attack against you (as you are merely quoting a Washington Post Staff Writer's article). But the author's analysis STINKS! There were significant circumstances in each of the Author's examples, that could easily explain why unemployment was lower or higher - that in the short term would out weigh the effect of taxes. But the worst is Sweden! Using Sweden as an example, is frankly pathetic! Sweden not only weakens Weisman's argument, it destroys it.