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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (22268)	9/11/2007 3:55:17 AM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217603

Defense (ex-Iraq) is about 1/3 of Federal spending at 600 Billion. Deficit is about 200 Billion. So cut Defense about 120 Billion, about 20%, to 480 Billion and then let it slowly expand back to about 550 Billion. About a 2% growth in tax collections will add about 48 Billion per year. Cut the rest of the discretionary items (about 500 billion) by 3%... So that's 183 Billion vs. 200 Billion in year one. Year two, economic growth means 48 billion more. So that means we can about 15 Billion to defense (up 3%) and still have a 16 Billion surplus ... and keep Vladimir Putin from getting a good night's sleep. ;-) ************ Better idea would be to start a US Sovereign Fund to buy up key industries and small countries ;-)

To: elmatador who wrote (22268)	9/11/2007 10:04:39 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217603

'Needs to cut government size and REDUCE taxes' LOL...never happen.

To: elmatador who wrote (22268)	9/11/2007 10:56:54 AM
From: zamboz	Respond to of 217603

We need to figure out which taxes need to be cut. The Alternative Minimum Tax certainly needs to be updated. It is largely a blue state tax on an expanding segment of the upper middle class. We need a debate about which tax cuts help and which hinder the economy. For some reason, we never get below the surface of the issue. It is always just idealogical discussion. Lower is better (how about no taxes?) or we need higher taxes for better services (how about 100% tax rates?).