> Robert Munn wrote:
> Nice try, but it's a tax cut. The "subsidy to the wealthy" line is just the

Here's why you're wrong:  If you simultaneously cut taxes and raise
costs all you've effectively done is shift taxes somewhere else while
also raising them.  Why?

Because the money is already spoken for by existing spending, but now
you've got new spending which you need to borrow to fund (in addition
to old spending we're already borrowing to fund).  That new borrowing
requires interest payments which raises costs even more!

Your thinking is caught up in a type of bang 'em gopher game.  You
think that just because you bopped your gopher on the head there are
no more gophers.  What you don't realize is that 3 more just popped up
elsewhere.

In this case Mr. Bush has just shifted the tax burden from the wealthy
to debt.  The payments on that debt kick in 2010 plus interest.  Who
do you think will get stuck with the bill?  The wealthy, or you?

WISE UP!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:152521
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to