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: tejek who wrote (607642)	4/13/2011 12:37:49 PM
From: Brumar89	3 Recommendations Respond to of 1587357

Obama already signed an extention of those tax rates for two more years. So they're the Obama tax rates now. Why do you fault the black President?

To: tejek who wrote (607642)	4/13/2011 2:32:49 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1587357

>> Any sound fiscal policy must reverse the Bush tax cuts As others have pointed out, they are the Obama tax cuts, NOT the Bush tax cuts. The real point, however, is that tax increases do not constitute any real contribution to solving the problem. ONLY spending cuts will work. When you increase taxes, you diminish economic growth, which effectively quells revenue growth. OTOH, decreasing spending will generate an economic surge as a result of business seeing that government is serious about making meaningful changes to its strategy. Tax increases provide no benefit at all. Spending cuts help in terms of deficits as well as in restoring consumer confidence. Seems pretty clear to me.

To: tejek who wrote (607642)	4/13/2011 4:07:19 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1587357

The tax cuts decreased revenue far less than the spending increases, or even just the civilian spending increases (which where much larger than the military increases). Any sane fiscal policy has to have controlling spending as its first priority. The deficit without all the extra social spending since Bush II became president (keeping real per capita spending the same, so real total, nominal per capita, and of course nominal total spending still climbs), and the deficit would be a surplus.