05-21-2004, 09:06 AM | #51 | |||
College Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Davis, CA
|
Quote:
Every year of Clinton's presidency, including the two years that Democrats were in control of Congress, either substantial reductions of the deficit or substantial increases in the surplus were achieved. The opposite happened throughout the Reagan-Bush I era, and again in the Bush II era. It's time for Republicans to give credit where it's due. There's no doubt that even more progress was made once the Republicans had control of Congress, but Clinton's economic policies were already having a big effect on fiscal discipline before that. Now, I will be the first to admit that Clinton embraced this policy as a response to Perot, but he did embrace, and he was extremely effective in following through on it. And he did have the country on course for a pay off of the debt in the foreseeable future, something Bush threw away with his tax cuts and budget-busting spending. Republicans have gotten away with calling Democrats a "tax and spend" party for a long time. However, the real truth is that at the national level, the Republicans have become the "borrow and spend" party, and have been getting away with that for close to a quarter century now without being called on it. |
|||
05-21-2004, 09:07 AM | #52 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Acouple of points. First, social security is not in crisis. It can be fixed for at least fifty years by extending payroll taxes to all income earned, means testing the benefits and bumping the retirement age a couple of years. If those solutions don't do it we won't need more than a two percent raise in payroll taxes. Social security is fine and those telling you otherwise have alterior motives. Now medicare on the other hand is in the shitter.
Second, the problem with this deficit is that it's structural. We have no good plan how to deal with it. The best Bush can do is claim to be able to cut it in half, but of course that won't happen because that claim didn't include Iraq funding. And the structural deficit will only get worse as more of the upper income tax cuts kick in and the Medicare drug benefit starts. Eventually we have to do something because we can't continue to add half a billion to the deficit every year. Finally, to those who believe we grew out of the Reagan deficit remember that's only part of the story. We also raised taxes three times, once each under Reagan, Bush1 and Clinton. Without those tax increases we wouldn't have come close to a balanced budget. |
05-21-2004, 09:39 AM | #53 |
Grey Dog Software
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL
|
JPhillips,
Look at the tax code in 1980 and then in 2000 and tell me again how raising taxes helped that 20-year boom in revenue |
05-21-2004, 10:10 AM | #55 | |
College Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Edmond, OK
|
Quote:
Hmm... The content of his posts doesn't seem to indicate a support for the current administration but his repeated use of the phrase is contrary to that content. Oh well, I guess I'll vote Bush because he said so... Four more years! |
|
05-21-2004, 11:09 AM | #56 | |
Grey Dog Software
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL
|
Quote:
What you've done is akin to someone saying "I like Ice cream" and you screaming "A-HA! I knew you were in bed with Ben & Jerrys!" |
|
05-21-2004, 12:13 PM | #58 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the yo'
|
Delebar=Bosco
|
05-21-2004, 12:17 PM | #59 | |
Grey Dog Software
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL
|
Quote:
My post was nothing about helping Bush. It was about economic theory. By saying I support tax cuts and think they positively impact economic growth has nothing to do with Bill Clinton, GW Bush, Hannity, James Carville or the mouse-looking girl giving a thumbs up in Abu Ghraib. Last edited by Arles : 05-21-2004 at 12:18 PM. Reason: added quote |
|
05-21-2004, 12:35 PM | #60 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the yo'
|
Quote:
Dude, there is no point arguing with this dude. |
|
05-21-2004, 02:50 PM | #63 | |
Greatly Missed. (7/11/84-06/12/05)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
__________________
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. |
|
05-21-2004, 03:05 PM | #64 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Is Delebar the BW of the liberals? He's bizarro Bubba!
|
05-21-2004, 04:12 PM | #66 | ||
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Concord, MA/UMass
|
Quote:
Textbooks for the course = $80 Coming back from your macroeconomic final and reading posts like this = Priceless (or depressing/frustating, depending on your POV) Quote:
|
||
05-21-2004, 04:34 PM | #67 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
A little pet peeve of mine - when discussing the issue of federal budgets and our financial situation, it's important to understand the difference between the deficit and the debt.
Deficit = any shortcoming in a yearly federal budget between what the government spends and what it takes in; Debt = the accumulated deficits of past years, in other words the total amount of money the U.S. government owes I notice some people throw around these words as if they're interchangeable, which they aren't, and some may not even know the difference which renders their arguments rather meaningless. As BishopMVP (I think) pointed out, this is also an area where using absolute numbers distorts the truth; looking at them relative to GNP is much more accurate and meaningful. I'm sure our budget deficits nowadays dwarf those at the beginning of the century in terms of absolute numbers, but either by adjusting for inflation or using percentages of GNP you get a much more accurate view of how they compare. Last edited by dawgfan : 05-21-2004 at 04:35 PM. |
05-21-2004, 05:21 PM | #68 | |
College Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Florida
|
Just FYI
link Quote:
|
|
05-21-2004, 05:39 PM | #69 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
I think most here would or already have agreed that the biggest thing driving the reduction in deficits in Clinton's first term and the surplusses in his second term were primarily driven by the expanding economy rather than budget policies driven by the White House or Congress. Still, as I've pointed out, both Clinton and those Congresses deserve some credit for not revising their budget spending upwards to match the growing tax revenue. By eliminating budget deficits in his second term Clinton and Congress were making some headway in paying down the National Debt.
|
05-21-2004, 09:32 PM | #70 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
I find it somewhat shocking that an economist working for a Republican would write a report that gives Clinton's policies no credit for economic expansion. It's almost as if he were showing a political bias.
|
05-21-2004, 10:02 PM | #71 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Moorhead
|
BishopMVP, I am with you. I support Bush on most things, but I am hardly a die hard republican. I am pro-choice, I am in support of Gay Marriage, I supported Clinton.
__________________
I had something. |
05-22-2004, 12:45 AM | #72 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the yo'
|
Quote:
I find it funny when someone crawls out of the woodwork and posts 1/2 of his total forum posts on 1 thread. This just screams that he's just an alias. |
|
05-22-2004, 01:56 PM | #73 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Quote:
Yup, definately a bizzaro Bubba. And if you think I'm a Bush supporter, than you have obviously not been paying attention. You accuse me of thinking in terms of black and white but then treat me as a huge Bush supporter just because I said something negative about you. You act like people have to hate Bush or love him...yeah, that's not thinking in black and white. |
|
05-22-2004, 02:01 PM | #74 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Quote:
Yeah, and if it is, we won't have to put up with this troll much longer. |
|
05-22-2004, 04:03 PM | #75 | ||
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Concord, MA/UMass
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
05-22-2004, 05:02 PM | #76 | |
Grey Dog Software
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL
|
Quote:
|
|
05-22-2004, 07:38 PM | #78 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Quote:
Let's see, you personally attack people, then cry about it when it happens to you, and then you spout off more personal attacks. This is getting entertaining. |
|
05-22-2004, 08:30 PM | #80 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Quote:
Ah, the classic "Na uh, you are" comeback. And what exactly have I been wrong about so far? |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|