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 (39060)	11/27/2009 1:25:19 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "Tax policy for a $13tril+ economy shouldn't revolve around a $43bil a year program." I really have no idea what you are saying there. But it sounds like 'soft on structural deficits' to me. All I know is that EVERY BUNCH of politicians has their own favorite federal expenses that they would PREFER to just put directly on the federal deficit... borrow to pay for and NEVER submit them to Pay-As-You-Go fiscal discipline. The result of that, (of course), is that the structural deficits grow and grow.... PS --- as per the latest estimates... that "$43 Billion annual cost" for the Af-Pak War (still far less then what we are paying every year in Iraq... pushing on close to a decade now), is expected to rise next year to around $68 Billion if the troop strength is increased by around 40,000.... Then again there will be the interest costs on that added debt (for generations to come).