Replies

Tax cuts increase spending dollars, 43 Billion worth is allot of pocket change.

People who spend money spend in at businesses.

There are a few issues with job right now, outsourcing and efficiencies are two of those issues. Thoae are real.

That does not take from the fact that the jobs we do have are due to consumer spending and tax cuts stimulate that.

While I do not claim that tax cuts alone fix economies you refuse to admit the fact that tax cuts can not only stave off a worsening economy, it is also a way to increase the single largest contributing factor in the US economy.

You are blasting a known and accepted step in economy building in an attempt to defend Warren Buffet.

Warren Buffet! That alone shows who here is dealing with reality.

You are defending Buffet to defend Arnold and I understand why. But you should really go back to Conservative Fiscal policy and defend Arnold with his positives, not putting makeup on his sows.

History proves the effectiveness of Tax cuts as a step in recovery and stimulation, your not going to win this argument with history.

Bull, you are again ignoring the details... I have never said cutting tax rates doesn't create stimulous, I stated one time checks don't... DETAILS are important, and you keep ignoring them.

Cutting rates, increases disposable income, not one time checks... one time checks don't do squat to stimulate growth! No company is going to hire more workers, invest in new infrastructure or inventory production for a temporary bounce, it just doesn't work that way. If you believe it does, then you have never sat in meetings where these types of decisions are made.

Growth comes through increased and sustained disposable income, not just a one time increase. This is why rate cuts do stimulate expansions, but one time checks don't. Corporate spending needs to expand, and its not going to expand for $300 checks.. they don't hire workers, or sales force, etc for temp bounces.

One time checks, do not salve they may temporarily halt reductions, but they don't HEAL the problems.

As to "defending Buffet for Arnold" that is hardly my reasons for what I have said, but if that makes you sleep better at night, then believe it. I don't think Buffet is unqualified for the position he's been tapped for, I don't see any evidence from you or anyone else, that is sustainable and shows he is. I do think Ahnold is the R's parties only chance of winning this recall, at least with any sort of mandate that will keep the cali legislature from simply stonewalling, for many reasons I have stated here as well.. but that's hardly why I challenge your bashing of Buffet.

Personally I don't live in California any longer, thank goodness, and as I have stated on this site MANY times over, I don't think the recall is a good thing at its very essense for Republican democracy, or long term for California, for a multitude of reasons. So if California Republicans want to shoot themselves in the feet again, or elect Arnold, or elect a Democrat or heck even decide to keep Davis, that's really their call.

However when someone bashes what economically can be classified as nothing less than an A player as a poor choice to handle the money, that's definately spin that just don't fly.