Can a nation remain a superpower if its internal politics are incorrigibly stupid?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

You left out Clinton.

You're darned right I did. Clinton left office with a huge surplus that Bush the Younger burned through like the trust fund baby he is.

And your Congress has spent a whole lot of money.

A whole lot. Much of it was spent on addressing the disaster Bush left him with. The emerging consensus is that it has been money well spent. Also, some of what Obama "spent" was actually tax breaks for people like you and me.

John

[piece-itpete]

Talk about the lies of the right!

"....The Clinton administration reported a surplus of $559 billion in its final four budget years. The audited numbers showed a deficit of $484 billion.

In addition, neither of these figures counts the financial deterioration in Social Security or Medicare. Including these retirement programs in the bottom line, as proposed by a board that oversees accounting methods used by the federal government, would show the government running annual deficits of trillions of dollars.
...."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...cit-usat_x.htm

Pete

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Talk about the lies of the right!

"....The Clinton administration reported a surplus of $559 billion in its final four budget years. The audited numbers showed a deficit of $484 billion.

In addition, neither of these figures counts the financial deterioration in Social Security or Medicare. Including these retirement programs in the bottom line, as proposed by a board that oversees accounting methods used by the federal government, would show the government running annual deficits of trillions of dollars.
...."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...cit-usat_x.htm

Pete

If that's accurate, then the Bush tax-cuts and invasion of Iraq dug almost deep enough to reach center earth. According to the article, Democrats at that time were trying to create a more realistic reporting method, but Bush opposed it. If Clinton had actually run a deficit, it would have been harder for Bush to make the rich richer. One area many have identified as a source of significant budget cuts is the military. The following comes from the same story:

Today, 18 of 24 departments and agencies produce annual reports certified by auditors. (The others, including the Defense Department, still have record-keeping troubles so severe that auditors refuse to certify the reliability of their books, according to the government's annual report.)

Regards,

D-Ray

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Talk about the lies of the right!

It's an opinion piece, Pete. We can all find one of those to support any position we want to defend.

FactCheck.org is a non-partisan organization that examines and refutes the lies or confirms the truths of the Left and the Right. Here's what they determined about the Clinton surplus.

Have a nice day ,
John

[piece-itpete]

Wanna bet Clinton opposed it, and Obama will too?

SS makes Iraq look like a cakewalk fiscal wise.

Besides, the only way Clinton managed to even pretend to cook the books was the 'peace dividend' (remember that?). Gut the Armed Services, like the USSR was the only threat there ever would be.

Pete

[piece-itpete]

Well, according to the OMB FactCheck is wrong.

Look at row B. If there was a surplus that number would go down. It doesn't.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...s/hist07z1.xls

Pete

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Wanna bet Clinton opposed it, and Obama will too?

SS makes Iraq look like a cakewalk fiscal wise.

Besides, the only way Clinton managed to even pretend to cook the books was the 'peace dividend' (remember that?). Gut the Armed Services, like the USSR was the only threat there ever would be.

Pete

Even if we don't have enemies with the capability of the USSR, the industrial military complex will invent them. Under Bush, it became the nebulous "theenemy." [sic] Moreover, the NeoCons needed a military buildup to impose their political philosophy in the rest of the world. We would be in much better shape if we still had a Clintonized military budget, or preferably, smaller.

Lets see our fiscal choices:

1: Cut taxes for the rich and invade a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

2: Cut taxes for the poor and middle class (folks who will actually spend the tax savings) as part of a stimulus package designed to prevent the recessionary economy from sinking into depression. Enact healthcare reform that, but for the effect of lobbyists, would produce more disposable income by making the cost of medical care a smaller part of the economy.

Regards,

D-ray

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Lets see our fiscal choices:

1: Cut taxes for the rich and invade a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

2: Cut taxes for the poor and middle class (folks who will actually spend the tax savings) as part of a stimulus package designed to prevent the recessionary economy from sinking into depression. Enact healthcare reform that, but for the effect of lobbyists, would produce more disposable income by making the cost of medical care a smaller part of the economy.

another powerful post, thanks

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Wanna bet Clinton opposed it, and Obama will too?

"It"?

SS makes Iraq look like a cakewalk fiscal wise.

It's solvent until 2030 something if we do nothing. If we a. roll back the Bush tax cuts or b. take SSI deductions beyond the current $102,000 cap it's solvent indefinitely.

Besides, the only way Clinton managed to even pretend to cook the books was the 'peace dividend' (remember that?).

So you say.

Gut the Armed Services, like the USSR was the only threat there ever would be.

That gutted armed services really got its ass handed to it during Desert Storm, huh?

John

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Well, according to the OMB FactCheck is wrong.

But the OMB lies! Right, Pete?

And, now that I've looked at your link, I see that you're confusing debt and deficit.

Try again, please.

John