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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (61286)	4/24/2008 11:01:12 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541996

Lane3; I'm "clearly" questioning your notion that your Buffet increases and job creation would be cost prohibitive. They wouldn't be cost prohibitive! I NEVER SAID THAT. The tax increase from the Buffet tax increase would pay for the job creation here at home. .......One is a revenue generator for government which would pay for the government expense of investing in infrastructure to create jobs. Here is an example of your dancing; I said......The list of items I suggested to get the economy moving were a list of things to do here at home. We could do those now of course but that would sink the dollar ever further as the governments spending fell further into deficit.<i/> To which you then completely change the meaning by quoting that statement as this;......We could do those [Buffet tax increases and job creation] now of course, but that would sink the dollar ever further as the governments spending fell further into deficit" The Buffet tax increase is NOT a way to create jobs - it is a way to pay for them. steve

To: Lane3 who wrote (61286)	4/24/2008 11:40:41 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541996

Lane3; You said; My reply, translated from the carefully modulated and civil original version <g> was "what the hell are you talking about, Buster? In what world do tax increases and job creation equate with massive spending? That is preposterous and I am incredulous that you would make such an assertion." Except that I mistakenly said "cuts" instead of "increases." Which blew the whole effect. To show how far off your comment is from what I originally said, I went back and here is the exact quote from message 61059 - it is me speaking........Good question. I would get us away from nation building and build up a nation - ours! I would tax people along the lines BUFFET has urged and invest those monies on infrastructure here at home. Tax people along the lines Buffet has urged and invest those monies on infrastructure here at home There is nothing confusing about that statement, but you have twisted it into something rather different. I call that dancing. steve