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 (746988)	8/4/2006 1:50:42 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

For example, they support such budgeting changes as PAYGO rules like we had during some of the Clinton/Rubin years. Taxes are at a certain rate. Keeping them at that rate is not something that has to be "paid for". If you want to apply such rules to any future cuts or any increases in spending I'd consider going for it, but probably only if you really applied them to all spending. You can't exempt the majority of the spending, entitlements. If you can't "pay" for such increases, than that spending can't increase either. If you don't apply it to all spending the system is inherently biased against tax cuts, as spending is allowed to greatly increase but tax cuts are not allowed.