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: i-node who wrote (686762)	12/1/2012 1:03:22 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584252

"The real question is why in hell would tax policy be in any way involved in these negotiations?" Because the lion's share of the debt was created by the Reagan/Bush tax cuts, in relatively GOOD economic times. Any serious person realizes it will take broad-based tax increases as well as cuts and reforms to get our house in order. Raising taxes on the very wealthy is a GREAT and logical place to start.

To: i-node who wrote (686762)	12/1/2012 2:16:59 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 1584252

Obama has actually asked for NEW spending of billions for an "infrastructure bank" aka a personal Presidential slush fund to be doled out to cronies.

To: i-node who wrote (686762)	12/2/2012 6:43:46 AM
From: Alighieri	2 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1584252

To hold essential spending cuts hostage to a tax increase is just a bad idea from the outset. Why does a tax cut that was designed to be temporary become a bargaining chip long since it's term has expired? In this I disagree with both sides....I have told you that before. This country has not yet come to grips with the fact that defense, health, and so on cost money. If you want to have a defense apparatus that dwarfs that of the rest of the world then you need to pay for it. Al