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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (290214)	6/6/2006 8:03:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571874

In any case, both rates could be raised to reduce our deficit and debt without damaging the economy, as Clinton/Rubin clearly proved 1 - The rates at the end of Clinton's raises where still much lower than before Reagan's cuts. Saying that high rates hurt the economy doesn't mean that any increase has to hurt the economy. 2 - Clinton/Rubin proved no such thing. But to be fair to them it would be incredibly hard to prove even if it was true. Their increase was considered in isolation probably a negative for the economy, but the budget balance was probably a plus and one factor effects the other. Also there are other major factors and uncountable numbers of minor factors. Its hard, probably impossible to isolate all the major factors and their results. If the economy grows by 4% in a year after a tax increase, it could be that it would have grown by 5% without the increase. If that is the case the increase hurt the economy.