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: tejek who wrote (326957)	2/22/2007 12:58:43 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576600

Maybe We Deserve to Be Ripped Off By Bush's Billionaires... ...Sanders's office came up with some interesting numbers here. If the Estate Tax were to be repealed completely, the estimated savings to just one family -- the Walton family, the heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune -- would be about $32.7 billion dollars over the next ten years. Those heirs didn't make the money by ripping anyone off The proposed reductions to Medicaid over the same time frame? $28 billion. 1 - Its a reduction in planned growth, not a cut, in fact spending would continue to increase. 2 - Even if it was a cut, not giving us much money to people as you used to, isn't ripping anyone off. Even if you're a traditional, Barry Goldwater conservative, the kinds of budgets that Bush has sent to the hill not only this year but this whole century are the worst-case scenario; they increase spending generally while cutting taxes and social programming. The biggest part of the total increase in dollar terms was in social spending. Taibbi does have a point about subsidies, and about not cutting total spending, but "you're just cutting spending on people who actually need the money" is not true as an overall statement because total social spending has greatly increased.