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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (22656)	11/27/2009 1:15:44 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Re: "Wow, you really missed my point." Was this your point (when you said "but when all of a sudden they want a war tax when all the other high priced liberal bills can be paid for by borrowing money")? If it is, then two quick points: 1) Haven't various lawmakers been asking that the two wars (closing in on a decade's length now...) be both put "on budget" (something Bush never did, but that the Obama Presidency has done now --- counting the war costs OFFICIALLY on the deficits now) and "paid for" through either revenue raises (taxes) or through dedicated spending cuts in other areas of the federal budget for at least five or six years now? So, resistance to putting all the war costs on the national credit card ain't exactly NEW or anything. We have heard this each year for well-on half a decade now. (Only in the first year or two of the wars, before people could see for themselves how very long and expensive they were likely to be) did the public and the Congress give the WH a "pass" on the issue of war funding and honest accounting for it.) (After all... these ARE the first big, expensive wars in the entire history of our country where we did not raise taxes to pay for them... instead of just running up debt for the next generation. I still remember the 10% income tax surcharge for the Vietnam War....) 2) Not really sure what exact "bills" you are referring to when you say "other high priced liberal bills can be paid for by borrowing money". Perhaps you could explain. Only big "bill" I can think of (still just proposals, not yet enacted into law) is the Health Care Reform effort --- which two main bills are "fully funded" through dedicated revenue raises (taxes, user fees, etc.) and / or dedicated cost cuts... at least according to the C.B.O. budget analysis --- they are not accretive to the federal deficit.