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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (359800)	11/21/2007 5:15:40 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574404

>Lots of people advocating "rolling back the Bush tax cuts" and/or raising taxes on the "rich" without any regard to what that would do to the economy. Oh, come on... Bush made the tax cuts and lowered the taxes on the rich without any regard for the economy, and look at the mess we're in now. -Z

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (359800)	11/21/2007 5:37:44 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1574404

<<Lots of people advocating "rolling back the Bush tax cuts">> Nobody has to "roll back" anything. The TEMPORARY tax cuts Bush managed to get his (R) Congress to pass and was NEVER able to make permanent are due to expire soon anyway. All that has to happen is nothing. The (D)'s are talking about EXTENDING tax cuts for America's suffering middle class - YOU, Ten.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (359800)	11/24/2007 12:08:00 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574404

"Lots of people advocating "rolling back the Bush tax cuts"" But that won't raise taxes to the point of maximum revenues. "and/or raising taxes on the "rich" without any regard to what that would do to the economy." Who say they aren't taking the economy into account? "The focus has always been on maximizing tax revenues so that government can better redistribute wealth." Show me where that language has been used by anybody. All you are doing is fear mongering. There is no proof to back any of your hysteria other than your WAGs. "It's a mix of socialism and Keynesian economics, all of which would require maximal tax revenues." Which shows you don't understand anything about Keynesian economics...