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 Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (16828)	4/9/2008 8:59:54 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 149317

With reagan it was military spending. With bush it was 9/11 and then iraq spending. Bush did a good job until it all got out of control with iraq and huge deficits post 03. Personally i think many democrats who post are just plain rich and dont care what taxes are like hollywood types. But the core of democrat voters know intuitively that despite the tax the rich rhetoric those high taxes eventually get them. Picture a dem president and dem congress with 60+ seats in senate to overried vetoes. Tax and spend to death will be the inevitable outcome unless the pres has the balls to use the veto. Thats why many folks like gridlock and thats where mccain will get a boost if dem congress landslide seems inevitable.

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (16828)	4/9/2008 9:01:17 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Please admit that a large part of the spending was for defense purposes.

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (16828)	4/9/2008 7:54:17 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 149317

Government revenue climbed drastically after the Reagan cuts and again after the Bush cuts. That's not true. In fact, revenue declined after the Bush cuts. The deficit problem is not from lack of intake. Not true........the lowered revenue intake hurt the deficit. Deficits are always a spending problem not an income problem. Bull. From where are you getting your economic info?

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (16828)	4/9/2008 9:55:20 PM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 149317

Deficits are always a spending problem not an income problem. That's a myopic way of looking at things. The truth is that it's a simple equation. Tax Revenues - Gov't Spending = Surplus, when Revenues exceed spending Tax Revenues - Gov't Spending = Deficits, when Spending exceeds Revenues So you can fix the problem one of three ways: 1) increase revenues or 2) decrease spending or 3) do a combination of both. Only morons would claim that the only way to reduce deficits is to decrease spending. Sounds like you are spewing the Republican playbook without really thinking about it.