+1 on your side.
145 BILLION
- Thread starter Cancel7
- Start date
+1 on your side.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I specifically said, "increasing spending and NOT generating the revenue to fund it." Bushes tax increases HAVE NOT funded his increased budget.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
You must be talking about the early Clinton years, when the Reagan tax cuts kicked in and put revenue in overdrive. As I recall it didn't take too long for Billy Bob to realize what was happening and match spending to suit.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
In the SHORT term you are correct. But it tends to be unstable in the long run and thus adversely effects the national debt. Which coincidentally is a part of the reason we have not had a fiscal year decrease in our nations debt since 1960 (Ike's last year).
The Reps cut taxes, but don't cut spending... debt raises
The Dems spend like a bunch of crack whores in need of their next fix.... debt raises. Occasionally the Dems will raise taxes to compensate for a portion of the increased spending, but still prostitute future generations for the sake of their current gratification.
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
DON'T insult drunken sailors; they got their PAY by working. They didn't simply appropriate it from others.
LMAO. yes Einstein. In the early Clinton years when he was in his lame duck term.
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion. "
Bush has never had an economic policy or an economic plan. God, when I think about all of the things this man has NOT done over the one thing that he HAS done, it is truly, truly depressing.
I remember him on the stump in 2000, campaigning on nothing but a big tax cut & "compassionate conservatism," whatever that is. He made fun of Gore's more targeted plan, and did a big, showy thing of having everyone who paid taxes raise their hand. He's say in that idiotic twang of his, "Well, you get a tax cut!"
He forgot to add that you get an infinitely bigger tax cut if you're rich, and that your children are going to end up paying for that when they're older if you're poor or middle class.
What a friggin' homer. I hope he is absolutely reviled by history. 2 terms! To hell with anyone who voted for this guy twice; I don't care if it was Kerry or Ted Kennedy or Paris Hilton running against him; there is no excuse.
I remember him on the stump in 2000, campaigning on nothing but a big tax cut & "compassionate conservatism," whatever that is. He made fun of Gore's more targeted plan, and did a big, showy thing of having everyone who paid taxes raise their hand. He's say in that idiotic twang of his, "Well, you get a tax cut!"
He forgot to add that you get an infinitely bigger tax cut if you're rich, and that your children are going to end up paying for that when they're older if you're poor or middle class.
What a friggin' homer. I hope he is absolutely reviled by history. 2 terms! To hell with anyone who voted for this guy twice; I don't care if it was Kerry or Ted Kennedy or Paris Hilton running against him; there is no excuse.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I'm sorry but I misunderstood. You had commented on my earlier post that Democrats will raise taxes, which they always do. I incorrectly assumed that you meant that raising revenue required increasing taxes.
So you agree that cutting taxes raises revenue?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Lets be VERY clear. Neither party is "more responsible". The budget cannot be done without Congress. Period.
Yes, when one party is in total control you tend to get an increase in the carnage. Look at the Dems under Carter or Johnson and the Reps under Bush.
As for Clinton and the Rep Congress... they did not "sustain" a surplus. They outspent revenues every single fiscal year. Period. The whole "budget surplus" is a fairy tale told to lemmings who are foolish enough to think it matters.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
That must have been after he rolled SS taxes into the general fund. Nice trick but I'm not buying.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Note: as a percentage of taxes paid, the higher income brackets were cut the least. In terms of dollars returned to taxpayers, YES, the rich got more back, because they put substantially more in. Was this the best plan? In my opinion, no. But lets do be honest about how the tax cuts were designed.
I agree with what I said and that is the tax cuts bush provided were not funded by tax receipts and as a consequence the federal debt is sky high is which will and has had damaging affects on our economy.
The story doesn't tell you that the "surplus" vanished in reality and debt increased, all while emptying the SS fund entirely and completely.
I think you’re being too hard on them.
A lot of them really wanted to vote for the Democrats…if only the Democrats had ran Zell Miller, or, a Republican, they would have too. They are so mad that the Democrats ran Democrats, and ruined their chance to vote for the Democrats. They still talk about it today.
SF? Am I right? You were really thinking about voting for the democrats, and probably would have, if they had run a republican? Damo too.
I’ll tell ya, the way things are shaping up for the dems, I might vote Republican…if they nominate a Democrat to head up their ticket.
No, I really might. I’m waiting to see if John Edwards sneaks onto the Republican ticket.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
What a great announcement. That means the national debt went down right? Oops.... nope.... it went up in the fiscal year 2000. How ever did that happen?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yeah, if the Democrats ran a republican on the Democratic ticket. I'd vote for them, if they were fiscally conservative. Otherwise. Nah.
I stopped voting for the uber religious democrat we ran in the last Presidential election...
I'm sorry. I must have missed your post about republicans decreasing ANY kind of debt.
Please be so kind as to repost.
Thanks in advanced.
LOL. Don't these alleged moderates/libertarians crack you up with that stuff?
"If you guys would just nominate Ron Paul on the democratic ticket, I'd vote democratic"