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.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (103260)	2/5/2009 5:09:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542060

Clinton was able to balance the budget and was heading toward record surpluses before handing power over to Bush. The important distinction is that Clinton (and the congress at the time) didn't massively add to spending the way Bush (and congress) did. If Obama wants to follow Clinton's example then he should contain spending. Bush went wild with military spending Maybe, but spending was raised a lot more in other areas. It might be more accurate to simply say "Bush went wild with spending". To be fair to him a lot of that increase was entitlement spending, which he couldn't hope to stop, but a lot of it was not. Now that we are in this huge mess and there are people suggesting that we balance the budget (in part) by not giving out food stamps. Almost no one is suggesting the budget should be balanced right now, or that we should stop giving out food stamps.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (103260)	2/5/2009 6:03:33 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 542060

Mary; Now that we are in this huge mess and there are people suggesting that we balance the budget (in part) by not giving out food stamps. You are distorting what I am arguing. I most certainly never suggested we balance the budget on the recipients of food stamps. I said that food stamps should NOT be a part of the stimulus bill. Pass as many food stamp bills you want, but pass them through the appropriations process so America can decide how much is appropriate. If you think that Clinton did a good job balancing the budget, then why not be in favor of what he did? His administration brought welfare under control and actually shrank the size of government. The instead the plan working it's way through congress resembles the Bush administration out of control spending. It's like Bush on steroids! Some of this is needed, as I have argued, but when you make statements like .........The situation now is such that spending for food stamps alleviate suffering and also stimulates the economy. You can't ask for better than that. ........makes me think all my work to help get Obama elected may have been a mistake! Lets just all go on food stamps if they are so stimulative. steve