Would this not get the DEMS back into the Whitehouse much quicker.
Could it be that they know that it will work?
Why are my fellow Democrats just stifling their conscience to this
truth?
"A conscience is a terrible thing to stifle"

Which jackass worries about deficit when the economy is tanking? It is
the weak economy and spending that causes deficits.  And it's
overtaxing that bust the economy.  I have not heard this idea
discussed, but I submit that surpluss may be a harbinger of a busted
economy.  The idiots boasted about a surpluss with a weakining
economy.  My humble mind tells me that there should never be a
surplus.  A surplus means that the government took too much from the
economy.
If we have a surpluss despite the wanton spending spree that
government indulge in then you know they really wacked the economy.

By the way nothing else will drive down the deficit as fast as a tax
cut.  Raising taxes could do it, but that would require taking even
more from the economy and since tax comes from the economy the surplus
would last as long as a snowball in hell.  No spending would do it
also but that would last less than that snobsll. and Usama and the
French would take the economy and the land.

That leaves tax-cuts.  But it must be substantial, it can't be
trickle-cuts or we will experience what is known as the BOILED-FROG
effect.  The boiled frog effect is as follows: if you put a frog into
a pot of cold water and turn up the heat slowly the will stay in and
boil to death.  But if you were to bring the water to a boil first
then through the frog into the pot, he would immediately jump out. 
Same with the economy, if you implement small tax cuts over an
extended period of time then the economy will not jump out of its
quagmire, but will just smuther and die like the grog.  Daschell is
aware of this, that is why the DEMS restrict the cuts to the lowest
they can get away with.  Good for the party, bad for the country.
Shame Shame. And I am a DEM!

Snipe at government agrees with you and gave very convincing arguments
(about two hours ago)to support your views. Go to www.abuzz.com. Click
on snipe at government to read snipe's profile and older posts. He
majored in economics in college and is a Libertarian = liberty =
freedom = lots less government = eliminate the income tax and replace
it with nothing.   Neil

I majored in economics in college and I dont agree with you for many
reasons:

1) While I agree with the theory that one can influence the economy
with fiscal policy, that doesnt necessarily mean running a defecit. It
is the increase in Government spending that helps the economy, not the
defecit. The idea that if there is a surplus, it means the government
is "taking too much out of it" is just a bit myopic. It is normal for
there to be peaks and valleys in the economy. Instability is very bad
for the economy. Monetary (like what the Fed does) and fiscal (like
what dubya does) policy can be used to keep things on a more even
keel. If the government runs a surplus during the good times, they
will have the money to increase spending during the bad times. The
defecit is harmful in the long run for the same reason it would be bad
for you to run up thousands of dollars on your credit cards. All debt
must eventually be paid back or defaulted on.

2) A tax cut can stimulate the economy. However, GWB's proposed tax
cut probably will not. Consider the major things that influence output
(Consumer spending, capital investment spending, government spending
and net exports).

 The Bush tax cut which puts lots of money into the hands of the
reletively wealthy certainly will not have a positive impact on
consumer spending. The wealthy as a group are the least likely to go
out and spend money they get back in the form of a tax cut. They are
most likely to save it.

It also will not increase capital investment spending. It may make
more money available for this but that will not necessarily mean that
businesses will be motivated to build new infrastructure. Most firms
are running at below capacity right now. It doesnt matter how low the
interest rates go or how much money they have for investing, they wont
invest unless they need to. No one is going to spend money to increase
their factory's output from 1000 widgets to 1500 widgets when they are
only able to sell 800 widgets.

Government spending might be something that could help the economy
(although there is some debate on this). FDR's "new deal" was an
attempt to do this. However, for the spending to have the most good,
it should be money spent on infrastructure that can help businesses
thrive in the United States. IMHO, spending money war mongering in
Iraq isnt going to be the kind of government spending that is going to
help the US economy.

Ok Sir Slynne, your turn.

First of all, please tell us what exactly your majoring in economics
tought you, that GW's Doctorates of economics failed to teach them? 
Dont pontificate, illostrate.  It is not enough to refute, you must
confute.

Your having majored in eco. tells you that tax increases don't Cause
nor tend to cause down-turns?  Fess up, are you hearing voices?  What
proof can you give?  You use language like not necessarily.  Who the
hell cares about necessarily.  The only thing that happens necessarily
is the appearance of the sun.  If the economy can turn because of the
sapping of funds viatoo much taxes, it will, says Murphy's Law.

Next you talked about "normal" cycling of the economy.  I submit that
the cycle is only thought of as normal because the experts have not
been able to detect the cause.  Stupid physisins say something similar
when they cant find the cause of an ailment.  The swan-song is: it the
normal process of growing old.  Yet everyone know ten other people the
same age who is perfectly  healthy.  Or "obnormal" according to their
stupid logic.  If your heart fibrulates from the time you werw born,
would it be normal because your doctors have not found the cause?

If the economy blosommed after JFK cut and tanked after taxes was
again raised, then blosommed again after Reagan cut, then stuttered
again after
Bush-1 was forced to increase, and tanked after Bill's mega hike then
you will need to do more than pontificate about your major to convince
anyone that that pattern does not indicate cause and realation.

Then you use stupid language like "GW's tax cut will probbly not..."
Is that the kind of wisdom majoring in Ec. afford you. If you go to
school for this and the best you can do is "probbly" then what good is
your schooling? and if you can't be sure then shut the "expletive" up
and let the man who is willing to put his job on the line to prove his
notion, do his best.  Here is what my major in common sense tells me:
if there has never been an instance when a tax increase has resulted
in an improved economy, then one would have to be either stupid or
venal to hike tax and expect a different outcome.

Your solution is for gov to spend on infrastructure, well this is not
a bad idea; however, it would not come about quickly enough as
legislators would need time to fight over which state should get how
much.  secondly, government has the worst reputation of wasting money
on ten thousand dollar hammers and the like.

You say deficit is bad, so what's new?  That is like saying that
negative amortization is bad.  Neg arm is great for investors. 
Deficit is the lesser of two evils.  Deficits come about by
over-spending after over-taxing, but a worse evil is recession...

NeilZero, I'll accept your comment as an answer, if you re-submit it
as such, I'll make you a star yet.  Not to mention the whopping buck &
a half in unmarked bills:)

Toughlover,

Neilzero is not a Google Answers Researcher, and cannot post an
official answer. The way to tell a Researcher from a non-Researcher is
to note whether a username is highlighted and "clickable."
Researchers' names are highlighted in blue, and clicking the name will
take you to that Researcher's profile.

Thanks El Pinko, lets pitition google to rate and tip commentators. 
Of course you would have to be a "Tough Lover", to root for something
that might be less than beneficial to your status:):):) PS lets root
for a spell checker also.