Collapse of stocks to propel deficits

Washington Times ^ | 8/28/02 | Patrice Hill

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

The loss of surplus revenue from taxpayers hit by the stock market's $7 trillion collapse since 2000 will affect the federal budget for years, the Congressional Budget Office said yesterday.

Deficits will linger for the next four years, and small surpluses will return by the end of the decade only if Congress holds the line against big new spending and tax cuts, the agency said in a forecast that for the first time projects massive losses of income and capital gains tax revenue from reduced stock earnings in the next decade.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Lower taxes depleting a surplus? What do we care about not maintaining a surplus? How does our business sector's role affect the market, the deficit, employment, GDP...? How are we improving their opportunities by increasing taxes, maintaining the death penalty, increasing estate taxes, imposing health care restrictions..., and not allowing them to operate under the freedoms ensured by our Constitution? And how does our nation justify what Dashole has depleted from our "surplus"? He's the person in charge and what hasn't he proposed that wasn't overspending? Who is he to now take the stand that tax cuts... are bad for America?

[ex-snook]

"Deficits will linger for the next four years, and small surpluses will return by the end of the decade only if Congress holds the line against big new spending and tax cuts, "

And we probably won't 'pay-as-we-go' for military costs and will pass those on to our children. We will also bequest a pilfered 'lock box' emptied of their social security contributions. Bend over generation X, here it comes.