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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Metacomet who wrote (20234)	9/5/2006 8:14:45 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 78408

The wealthy do not invest to create jobs. I see, they park their cash in banks or spend it like the effete snobs they are on yachts and diamonds. And what pray tell do banks do with it? uh-huh.. they loan it out.. and what do these loans do? wait I got it, they go to foreign countries to spend on oil projects and they are not paid back! And the poor and the middle class.. they invest in America and build business all over. Yes I see that. Corner stores here and there.. well I will grant you that small business of less than 50 employees were an employer of 60% of the CDN and US work force.. but that was long ago. perhaps 60 years. Now it is big business. Loblaws has 100,000 employees in Canada. Food. Used to be maw an paw butcher shops and local feed lots. Now it it it is Burns and Wal Mart, A&P. In two generations or maybe even in one. And what did they call these owners of businesses 60 years ago? The corner feed lot, and butcher, the local small business man? They called them well to do. Rich I think it was. But they were most certainly not big business. State wide enterprise. No, the people who started all those businesses were rich men. Millionaires or if they started small, damn near. Sutter was a millionaire. Look what he started. Aside from the environmental regulations could they have such a gold rush today? I doubt it. Sutter would be overtaxed. He could never have built his mill. Far too expensive for the meagre return of a small community of the American River with our growth rate and tax system. The purpose of taxes is to build and maintain civic insfrastructure and supply services that make sense not to farm out to private industry. Roads, schools, hospitals, army etc.. It is not to make money hand over fist. I have heard that Reagan made demand side economists more in vogue. But he didn't prove their case. That president so far has not been born. I don't know that trickle down or voodoo economics is all that bad. Nobody ever gave it a fair chance. Not in a real free booting way. All Reagan did was lower taxes a bit. NOt that much. And he did not or could not control spending. He was a genius at one thing. Getting consent from public speaking. He was a good actor. No, I don't believe he was an economic genius, but he had the right instincts. When Reagan lied nobody died, and no one threw their dress in the ring either. Everyone these days is saying that free trade is a great idea. I was never for it. It makes no sense to nations large of small. It doesn't hurt or help Peru, and it may in the long run cause many jobs to disappear in Canada and the US. It works only as long as people co-operate faithfully. What we learn about nations is that they never do. EC<:-}