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 : John McCain for President -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan B. who wrote (5457)	10/30/2008 7:22:23 PM
From: Little Joe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 6579

And I would add the problem is not on the revenue side but on the spending side. The tax cuts do generate a lot of extra tax revenue. But the pols manage to spend it faster and faster. Here in Maryland the State budget has more than doubled in the last ten years and when the amount of State Revenue drops a few percent, instead of looking for ways to save money, they raised our taxes again. It is disgraceful. Little joe

To: Dan B. who wrote (5457)	10/30/2008 7:48:34 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6579

Wrong. The tax cuts were projected to cost $4 trillion from 2004-1014, or $400 billion per year. cbpp.org Our deficits have averaged about $400B per year since 2004. en.wikipedia.org We wouldn't have deficits if there had been no Bush tax cuts. We have to stop pretending that tax cuts increase tax revenues. They simply do not. It's simple math. If you cut taxes, but do not cut spending, you will run deficits. That's what Bush did. Rolling back the tax cuts is not socialist. It's called responsible fiscal governance.