SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (168)8/30/2011 11:06:29 PM
From: Murrey Walker  Respond to of 85487
 
There is no trust among Republicans that new revenues would go to reduce the deficit. Past performance suggests they would all be spent on new programs.

Yes, I agree. Perhaps my statement was a little clunky.

For the Republicans to turn a deaf ear to new taxes under the guise that the proceeds would go to unnecessary government programs, is not exactly where most folks in this country would like to be, like it or not.

Granted they're sick and tired of failures coming from the democrat's president, but they want to see a little flicker of light in front of them.

Somewhere, somehow, the fact is, this little/big (your choice) pissing contest between parties has to end and work toward a realistic solution has to happen.

The alternative is unthinkable.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (168)8/31/2011 6:04:51 PM
From: KyrosL  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 85487
 
Past performance suggests they would all be spent on new programs

That is not true.

Clinton increased taxes and, with the help of Congress, controlled spending, so that by the end of his term people like Greenspan claimed the government would be running surpluses as far as the eye can see, and there was a danger of retiring all government bonds and not having them as interest rate benchmarks. This was the justification for the Bush tax cuts.