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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (33848)	3/9/2009 3:39:37 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Respond to of 71588

"SHOULD TAX CUTS 'count' as 'spending'??????????? " Cuts in tax rates no. Refundable tax credits that bring the liability on a tax down to below zero? Well the part below zero could reasonably be considered spending, or at least the equivalent of spending, more than they are actual tax cuts. There are several situations in which "tax cuts" should probably be considered spending. If tax receipts are credited yet not received then it should be called spending: FICA taxes not collected yet credited to individuals accounts as if received would be spending. EIC is clearly spending, when the FICA taxes of one employee is directly paid to another. Income tax reductions are not spending, just forgoing higher collection rates.

To: TimF who wrote (33848)	3/10/2009 11:26:52 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Sounds like slippery 'weasel words' to me. If SOME tax cuts need to actually be 'counted as spending', while OTHER tax cuts need to 'not be counted as spending... then someone needs to take that peculiar (and totally undefined) new definition and go back over the past 30 years or so of economic history, and go through each President's economic policies and reclassify all their policies --- because I AM CERTAIN that --- under this new and peculiar definition --- a whole Hell of a lot of old tax reductions would need to be called "spending" now! (The Reagan administration alone will prove fertile ground for redefining history, and so too will the Clinton and Bush II years!). Now, I'm an old-fashioned sort... none of this NEW-SPEAK for me. To me --- ONLY MONEY THAT GETS APPROPRIATED AND THEN SPENT should be called 'spending'... but you kids can go on having fun with you New Age 'PC' redefinitions if you wish....