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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: denizen48 who wrote (44986)	11/14/2017 2:37:43 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 358407

You are a very dense individual. What is it that you think I don't get? Could it be that the shortfall is in your expression rather than my comprehension? The tax cuts are not meant to stimulate the economy; they’re meant to stimulate spending cuts. So, just how is it that the road to spending cuts begins with tax cuts? You have not yet told me. You've told me: --that Nordquist favors small government; --that there are cuts to social programs in the tax reform proposal; and --that Senate rules require tax cuts to be offset with spending cuts. All of which I already knew. None of which is an explanation of how tax cuts stimulate spending cuts. Whether or not tax cuts stimulate the economy, in general, or could be expected to in this set of circumstances is debatable. That tax cuts enrich some people is a sure thing. That tax cuts produce a Pavlovian response among certain voters and donors is also a sure thing. That tax cuts stimulate spending cuts, well, I can't see how, which is why I asked, and no basis for that has been presented by you. If I'm so dense, please explain which particular gem of a linchpin I missed.