| Name: |
MartiniMan
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
October Deficit=$176 Billion!!
|
|
Date:
|
11/12/2009 3:18:49 PM
|
Think about it folks. Just a short year ago America elected a guy who was excoriating Bush over a $440 billion total deficit who has now given us a one month deficit equal to 40% of that number. ONE MONTH!!! Our children and grandchildren are going to hate us for this and who can blame them......
|
| Name: |
cobra
-
|
|
| Subject: |
October Deficit=$176 Billion!!
|
|
Date:
|
11/12/2009 10:47:24 PM
|
The sad thing is there is nothing we can do about it. I agree that our children and grandchildren will have to pay for all the reckless spending our country is doing.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
October Deficit=$176 Billion!!
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 4:40:48 PM
|
Obama did not create the deficeit -- Bush did his share too with a war that was totally unnecessary. So when you are worrying about the future for your children and grandchildren, make sure you remember correctly how we got here. Bush started his Presidency with a surplus.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
October Deficit=$176 Billion!!
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 4:52:05 PM
|
What was the deficit when Obama started his presidency?
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Bush is an idiot
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 4:55:54 PM
|
He did spend like a Dumbacrat on speed, and I heard him say that the bailouts ran counter to his ways.... but he STILL supported them. The problem now is the exponential rate in the increase of overspending; and just wait for the healthcare takeover.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Not an idiot...but not
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 5:12:14 PM
|
a conservative on fiscal issues. Frankly, had the porkulus gone to actually stimulating private sector jobs instead of paying of the SEIU it would have at least had a more positive impact, albeit at much greater cost or less efficiency than permanent tax cuts. I didn't vote for Bush because I thought he was a fiscal conservative, I voted for him because I knew the absolute nightmare we would have with Algore or John F'ing Kerry (who served in Vietnam you know).
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
an idiot
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 5:21:02 PM
|
If you spend more money than you have - I will call you an idiot, not a fiscal liberal or progressive or whatever. Bush held the reins, so I will hold him responsible for the damage inflicted during his presidency.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
an idiot
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 6:04:42 PM
|
And shame on us as voters for letting this go on. All of us know you can't overspend your personal income -- at least not for long -- but we continue to elect politicians who do this.
And BTW, I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how we could have a surplus (Clinton) when we still had a deficeit. As long as one owes money, they are never out of debt. How can it work different for the government?
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
an idiot
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 6:37:15 PM
|
I may be wrong (ask Feb if that is possible :>) ) but didn't the Clinton-era results ride te crest of the dot-com charade? I don't remember the exact dates, but wasn't it about that time that multimillionaires were created based on absolutely nothing but empty promises of dot-com billions in profits?
Willing to hear alternative opinions,
NH
|
| Name: |
Psycho
-
|
|
| Subject: |
an idiot
|
|
Date:
|
11/13/2009 7:22:04 PM
|
Hound...are you saying that we really didnt have a surplus when clinton was president? Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?
Also,I remember something about clinton selling 240 million? barrels from our oil reserves to 'I think" china...Then as soon as it was on the books, he said "I've balanced the budget" then bought the same oil back for 5 dollars a barrel more than what he sold it for???? Someone tell me if thats true memory, or a delusion brought on from a drug induced comma. .....Ok...joking there...but serious about the questions.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
That's What I'm saying
|
|
Date:
|
11/14/2009 9:35:16 AM
|
To me, a surplus is when you have no debt and you have extra money. Now I realize that some economists would no doubt say that the surplus was because we were able to service our debt and still have money left over.... to them I would say that we were still accumulating interest on the debt we had, so it wasn't truly a surplus.
And yes, I do believe that the Dot.com bubble took place around the same time... till someone popped the bubble and found out it was nothing more than air. I never invested in dot.com companies -- anything that looks too good to be true usually is.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Debt versus deficit
|
|
Date:
|
11/15/2009 11:21:22 AM
|
Hound, the way you can have a surplus and debt at the same time is classic Washington way of thinking. The federal debt is a cumulative number (simplistically all the surpluses minus all the deficits....I know its way more complicated than that). A surplus is created when tax revenues in a current year exceed current year spending. So during the Clinton era two things happened simultaneously to create a surplus....significantly reduce spending (Republican's pushing back on certain domestic spending programs and Clinton reducing expenditures on the military) and raising taxes (too much as he said in his own words).
The casualty of that approach was Hillarycare, welfare spending, a somewhat reduced military capability and the tax increases caused a mini-recession that paved the way for W to beat Algore in 2000. Of course none of this takes into account the unfunded entitlement programs that essentially will bankrupt us and wipe any short term surpluses in a given year.
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Lake Martin
Login
|
Home
