To: Scumbria who wrote (145368 ) 5/14/2001 4:49:00 PM From: CYBERKEN Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670 So you finally want a course in macro-economics. Of course, feel free to jump right into Freidman, Guilder, etc. but it boils down to this: In a macro-economy, the nominal amount of anything has very little meaning because the system is dynamic. The level of the national debt or the annual deficit cannot be gauged unless it's seen in proportion to the entire economy (GDP). The proportion of debt-to-economy has been consistently shrinking for 20 years because of the Reagan economic reforms. Only a radical expansion of federal power well beyond the political capabilities of the Clinton administration could have kept the national debt from shrinking during the rapidly growing Reagan economy. For similar reasons, we are remiss for accepting, in our public debate, many other myths: 1) That capital-friendly tax cuts cost anything. 1.6 trillion vs 1.35 trillion my ass! In 2 years we will be fighting over how much of the "new surplus" to refund. 2) That trade deficits are ruinous. During the Reagan prosperity we have bought more than we have produced. The "cows" won't "come home" on this. It's a dynamic system, and we are, in the process, creating markets for ourselves. It's the GROWTH, stupid. 3) That government spending must be limited because we can't afford it. It must be limited, of course, but because government itself must be limited or it will come to oppress us, thus killing growth, and bringing on the national bankruptcy you are so afraid of. There's more, but if you could just learn the stuff above, you'd be on your way to enlightenment that no one here thinks possible for you. I won't hold my breath...