Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChanceIs who wrote (106271)	2/22/2008 2:25:04 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I know that Chancels. Everybody knows that. The "there was no surplus" is the favorite chant of the Bush Explode-o-nomics deniers. But the fact is, there were projections for spending and those were exceeded, TO THE DOWNSIDE, relative to receipts, for the period in question which was the 90s. It doesn't matter if you bring in more receipts or spend less, you manage to your forecast and the Clinton team did that. For example, when the dollar is rising so dramatically, international demand for dollar denominated assets (stocks) explodes. Stocks go up, which is corporate currency, companies feel rich, HIRE, and pay workers better. Since the workforce pays a higher percent of their income to various taxes than anybody else.... its a win win for the treasury and thats what happened with Clinton. They weren't budgeting for those receipts but they got those receipts as a result of prudent fiscal management. BTW I credit Gingrich and the 90s congress with this as much as Clinton. What the hell happened in this decade to the idiots running our country, I do not know. I completely agree with the link below. BTW I do think Bush understands the social security timebomb coming. The problem is he proposed reform, AFTER he had implemented the incredibly toxic medicare drug program pork extravaganza which costs close to another trillion!. At that point, I didn't want Bush touching anything having to do with this budget and most americans felt the same way. Government Spending: Lowest in Over Three Decades · 1981-92. Under Presidents Reagan and Bush, Federal government spending as a share of the economy increased from 21.6 percent in 1980 to 22.2 percent in 1992. · Today. Under President Clinton, Federal government spending as a share of the economy has been cut from 22.2 percent in 1992 to a projected 18.5 percent in 2000 -- its lowest level since 1966. clinton4.nara.gov