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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (554693)	3/16/2010 5:45:11 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571985

If the taxes had started during a period of recession it would have been counterproductive to recovery. True, but that seems fairly irrelevant to a point about how the taxes are going to start first. But cost savings would grow faster than outlays Mostly handwaving. The CBO also estimates the deficit will fall farther in the decade following the '10-'19 estimate, by a quarter to a half of a point of GDP. They may say a lot more than this, but just that statement is pretty meaningless. "The deficit will fall" doesn't imply "this program will cause the deficit to fall". If they mean the later, I'd rather see a fully developed argument that could be responded to, rather than just take it on faith. Also it assumes that all the proposed Medicare cuts will stick. If they will, they are mostly a separate issue. The savings would be from Medicare cuts, not new mandates and regulations, and subsidies. The actual "Obamacare" (or whatever you want to call it, its not like he personally wrote the thing) would increase costs. But they aren't very likely to stick. If just lopping money off of entitlement spending was so easy, entitlements would not have proven so difficult to control in the past.