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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (260106)	7/12/2010 1:32:01 PM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

here's how it works: raising taxes always means raising expenditures MORE (please read the above 3x and THINK about it) cutting taxes does a number of positive things 1) It pays people to invest capital in ventures that grow the real economy. 2) It pays people to work harder. 3) Laffer wasn't a liar -- cutting taxes actually increases revenues. But before you start with the flames -- we don't have an UNDER-TAX problem -- we have a problem of matching REVENUES to EXPENDITURES. This problem can only be fixed by reversing the trend in ONE manner -- cutting expenditures. Before you start with the drivel -- show me ONE instance in history where a government has balanced its books by simply raising taxes to meet expenditures. Government size IS the problem and the worst BUBBLE of all of them -- period. Don't cite Bush and Reagan again -- they WERE NOT fiscal conservatives -- they DIDN'T CARE expenditures or size of government EITHER.