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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (10828)	2/3/2006 7:47:05 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541776

A Heritage Foundation spokesperson is hardly a partisan free advertisement. Such an observation would require a rather large amount of evidence. Wow, that seems rather cynical to me. Sure the Heritage foundation has its biases but so do other sources, perhaps every other source to a greater or lesser extent the bolded statement is a simple statement of readily verifiable fact. (The budgets for each year are available online for free) There might be some bias over what is selected as "a government benefit program". Perhaps a different selection could give you something other than a reduction in "total growth in federal benefit programs over the next five years from 39 percent to 38 percent.", but if its 32% or 25% or 1% its still not a cut let alone a slash. The difference required to make a 38% increase in to "slashing spending" is not something that any normal level of bias could account for. The statement in the Heritage article would have to be a bald face lie, not just an example of bias. If you want to look at the raw data yourself go to gpoaccess.gov For something more accessible you could check out aei.org aei.org or the other links at Message 22131309 Yes the American Enterprise Institute is also biased but their data shows all the major federal departments so the possible selection bias is eliminated. But maybe their liars too?? The other links are not quite as informative but they include liberal, conservative and libertarian sources. Its unlikely they would all be biased to a great degree in such a way as to try an paint the administration as increasing spending if it was really slashing it. Tim

To: JohnM who wrote (10828)	2/3/2006 7:47:18 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541776

A Heritage Foundation spokesperson is hardly a partisan free advertisement. Such an observation would require a rather large amount of evidence. I didn't offer that bit as evidence of the size of the "cut," only the usage. I noticed the source, too. It wasn't the best example but I wasn't going to waste my time looking for a better one because I believe that my assurance plus that small example for illustration is reliable enough for Suma, the one who asked. I'm not going to go looking, but the next time I see something that is clear on the meaning of "cuts," I'll post it.