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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (531896)	11/23/2009 2:19:25 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574441

"under Clinton, there was no surplus but deficits were reduced." Why did Bush claim he was returning the surplus as tax rebates then? Was he wrong about the surplus too?

To: i-node who wrote (531896)	11/23/2009 6:01:02 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574441

Well, that's convenient for you. So you are now claiming that using fiscal years is more accurate than calendar years. I'd say they are equally correct. There really isn't anyone other than you who disputes that we ran surpluses during the Clinton years. You and I have gone through an exercise in looking at debt levels to calculate the surpluses, but remember that's a secondary way to calculate it. Surpluses are primarily calculated as revenues minus expenditures. They didn't necessarily have to pay off the debt with those surpluses.