Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Talk of reducing the deficit fell by the wayside this month when President Obama unveiled a plan to extend all of the Bush tax cuts -- but a bipartisan pair of senators are reportedly hoping to revive the deficit discussion next year.
Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia and Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia have been leading a group of more than 20 senators in a discussion about deficit reduction for months now. The group quietly deliberated over the issue while a bipartisan commission created by President Obama put forward its own ideas for deficit reduction.
Where were they when we needed them...I'll tell you, Voting For Tax Cuts For The Wealthy Funded With Money Borrowed From Communist Chinese Banks...pay particular attention to the Clinton years:
Talk of reducing the deficit fell by the wayside this month when President Obama unveiled a plan to extend all of the Bush tax cuts -- but a bipartisan pair of senators are reportedly hoping to revive the deficit discussion next year.
Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia and Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia have been leading a group of more than 20 senators in a discussion about deficit reduction for months now. The group quietly deliberated over the issue while a bipartisan commission created by President Obama put forward its own ideas for deficit reduction.
Where were they when we needed them...I'll tell you, Voting For Tax Cuts For The Wealthy Funded With Money Borrowed From Communist Chinese Banks...pay particular attention to the Clinton years:
.................... and after the democratic congress of the last four years has added $6 trillion in debt, should there be anything else that we SHOULD talk about?
It really seems as though liberals believe that there is a bottomless pit of money and that adding trillions of dollars to the national debt every year will have no consequences. This democratic congress (congress spends the money) has been the most fiscally irresponsible congress in the history of the US. After the financial damage they have done, of course we need to talk about massive spending cuts. To not do so will result in insolvency, which liberals just do not seem to understand.
.................... and after the democratic congress of the last four years has added $6 trillion in debt, should there be anything else that we SHOULD talk about?
It really seems as though liberals believe that there is a bottomless pit of money and that adding trillions of dollars to the national debt every year will have no consequences. This democratic congress (congress spends the money) has been the most fiscally irresponsible congress in the history of the US. After the financial damage they have done, of course we need to talk about massive spending cuts. To not do so will result in insolvency, which liberals just do not seem to understand.
Oh come on hawkeye it wasn't just the liberals & who was it that said "deficits don't matter?" Apparently they DO.
Both parties are equally responsible & to believe either one & the rhetoric they spew at this juncture is pointless.
I'm glad to see some bipartisan effort at the very least.
You lose all credibility the mninute you claim Clinton years had a surplus.. They didnt.. they were projected surpluses, but the national debt continued to climb yearly.. In addition, the GOP cut the deficits during the Clinton years.. CONGRESS controls the budget, not the President..
You lose all credibility the mninute you claim Clinton years had a surplus.. They didnt.. they were projected surpluses, but the national debt continued to climb yearly.. In addition, the GOP cut the deficits during the Clinton years.. CONGRESS controls the budget, not the President..
When Clinton left office three years in a row the nation had taken in more revenue than it had spent...that's called surplus. The administration and congress were arguing about how to spend the surplus. Slow Walkin' Slow Talkin' George fixed that. He spent it on tax cuts for the wealthy and began, for the first time in U S history to borrow from Communist Chinese banks to fund it.
Oh come on hawkeye it wasn't just the liberals & who was it that said "deficits don't matter?" Apparently they DO.
Both parties are equally responsible & to believe either one & the rhetoric they spew at this juncture is pointless.
I'm glad to see some bipartisan effort at the very least.
Deficits dont matter if the result of those deficits are economic growth..
For example..
I'm planning on purchasing a new printer next year. The printer will cost me $125,000, which means next year if my businesses have $0 profit, which they usually do, I'll run a $125,000 deficit..
But if I buy that printer and it results in me being able to increase my revenues by $1,000,000 a year, and it increases my profits by $100,000 a year.. according to your argument, its "bad".. But the economics indicate otherwise.. I'll run deficits forever, doesnt matter.. as long as the result is growth.. See the difference?
Your problem is that you either can't read or you're too stubborn to do it.
When Clinton left office three years in a row the nation had taken in more revenue than it had spent...that's called surplus. The administration and congress were arguing about how to spend the surplus. Slow Walkin' Slow Talkin' George fixed that. He spent it on tax cuts for the wealthy and began, for the first time in U S history to borrow from Communist Chinese banks to fund it.
Its only a surplus if you ignore the debts created by intragovernmental holdings.
It must suck that the federal governments own website on debt confirms it went UP every year during the Clinton administration and there was never a surplus.
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 12-25-2010 at 09:50 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
