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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RMF who wrote (72137)	9/15/2009 2:40:33 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224720

Bush gave $2 Trillion away for the tax cuts No he gave zero away through tax cuts. Perhaps he took 2 trillion less, but taking less isn't giving it away. It isn't the government's money where letting you keep it means the government is giving to you. Its our money that the government takes to a greater or lesser extent. There is reasons to suggest that actual cost to government balance is less than a simple static projection would suggest, perhaps much less, not negative, I'm not saying the tax cuts raised revenue, but they don't cost as much as calculations which ignore the economic benefits of tax cuts would have us think. But if your two trillion figure is accurate it supports my point, that the deficits where mostly a matter of additional spending. That trillion less I mentioned is PER YEAR, at the end of the period, not for Bush's whole term. And NOW we have to spend $100's of billions more on Afghanistan because Bush didn't do the job there We've been doing the job there. The enemy isn't going to dry up and blow away just because your doing the job. They are resourceful and committed people, not simple objects that don't adjust to your strategies and plans.