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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (123486)	7/7/2005 5:56:49 PM
From: D. Long	Respond to of 794027

Can you read? Can you? The fact that you dismiss genomics off hand seems to prove my point quite nicely. Economics is a major branch of modern knowledge, but as I have pointed out, there is very little true divergence between the majorities of either party on this issue. Even the fairly extreme left is no longer communistic, not nearly what China is, and China is clearly a functioning economy. So the range of functional economic systems easily encompasses the range of views held by the majorities of both libs & conservatives. The same is not true in biological science And as I have said, and you either cannot understand, don't know your politics, or are intentionally dense, the Democratic party majority is not represented by Bill Clinton and the economic moderate DLC Democrats. They are represented by the anti-corporate, anti-global free trade Democrats that are little different than their socialist labor unionism counterparts of the past. The Democrats turned to Clinton in desperation to get elected. Look at the Presidential candidates from the last election, and you see the true face of the party. Every one of them, minus Lieberman, rejected the economics of Clinton. How much chance did Lieberman stand against the economic populism of Kerry and Edwards, or the trade union populism of Gephardt? The Democratic majority are economics-wackos, and selective in their insistence on biological science rationalism. Derek

To: neolib who wrote (123486)	7/8/2005 2:16:05 PM
From: Bridge Player	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794027

Neolib: You said: "Economics is a major branch of modern knowledge, but as I have pointed out, there is very little true divergence between the majorities of either party on this issue." Nonsense. If you look carefully at the majority of both Democrats and Republicans in both houses of Congress, you will see clear differences between their economic philosophies. Democrats want to raise taxes to cut the deficit. Republicans, by and large, realize that to cut the deficit, you cut taxes, not raise them. This from another post from LindyBill: Deficit tide ebbing Washington Times By Donald Lambro July 7, 2005 The good news this week is the unexpected surge in federal tax revenues that is slashing the federal budget deficit by about $100 billion. This is especially welcome news to supply-side tax-cutters who argued all along that lower tax rates spur stronger economic growth, which, in turn, creates more jobs that increases tax revenues. That is happening now. It's embarrassing news for President Bush's diehard Democratic critics, who predicted his tax cuts would worsen the budget deficits and drive the government deeper into debt. They argued throughout last year's elections that the tax cuts failed to grow the economy, create jobs or improve fiscal health. Surely, it has become quite clear they were wrong on all counts -- again. I urge you to read the entire post: Message 21484267