My family has had our version of call screening for at least 10 years now. We registered our phone number under my wifes maiden name and when they call looking for her other husband we just hang up.

My family has had our version of call screening for at least 10 years now. We registered our phone number under my wifes maiden name and when they call looking for her other husband we just hang up.

RE: Flight of fancy.

Matt,
The idea is great. Unfortunately, it is way too effective to appeal to stay-in-office-at-all-costs politicians. We can only hope that kind of accountability will eventually appeal to voters before we're all broke.

I notice too, Dan (and how can anyone not) a LOT of dissatisfaction with Bush among conservatives on the deficit. I need to look harder, but I don't see ANYONE defending his new budget....(?)

The Do Not Call Registry is not bad for the price and should reduce the number of junk phone calls, but it can only do so much -- https://www.donotcall.gov/FAQ/FAQConsumers.aspx#Exceptions "You may still receive calls from political organizations, charities, telephone surveyors or companies with which you have an existing business relationship"

That's quite a lot of loopholes. Then there are offshore companies, and those who bet that the most people won't bother to file complaints and/or that the FTC won't be able to prosecute very many complaints in a timely fashion.

Matt, I notice that telephone surveys are allowed. For quite awhile after I registered I got very few telemarketer calls, but lately some are using the ploy that I'd answered survey questions several months ago. I tell them no, I didn't but then I'm told I must've forgotten. And strangely enough some are even recording their message onto my answering machine; they must be desperate !

Yep, I think they're really scratchin' now, Lorna.

Here's the next question, of course. About which much has been written, that I haven't done an up-to-the-minute review of, quite yet.

Spam.

Some say, outlaw it entirely. Wouldn't bother me a bit, "free speech" issues aside.

This isn't "speech." It's harrassment.

That's so, even if the Nigerian form-e-mail scam is a transparent hoot; and likewise the E.D. drug pitches bearing obscure subject lines to avoid filtering out by Inbox Assistant, or equivalents.

Anyway, a blanket spam ban won't happen.

Any reader comments on what further to expect in spam management - regulation-wise, not software-wise?

Matt

Tax cuts at all income levels help the economy grow. Tax cuts spent by individuals certainly go towards purchases (as yours did). However, defict spending does the same thing. It puts dollars into the economy.

Tax cuts work best when marginal rates are reduced, improveing the after tax rewards for risk taking and work. Why not reward the work of as many people as possible.

Cuts in taxes on dividends and capital gains cut the cost of capital and reduce the hurdle rate future investments must earn. Lower the cost of capital and investment expands. Increased investments expand the economy.

There's political economy going on. The poorest should pay no taxes up to higher and higher levels. That's fair. And the rich should pay their share with targeted areas of investment. Across the board dividend cuts are just for rich- they don't need a tax cut. Deficits are also largely financed by foreigners buying our debt. Bush does the Republican thing well- he gives tax cuts and keeps spending down. Who are the conservatives going to vote for- Kerry????