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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (114293)	5/27/2012 1:50:15 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

I knew you were going to go into that swamp. Clinton did what he could and a thousand times better than Bush, so all you are doing is muddying up the water. If what you are saying is true, why did bush say the government should not have all those surpluses and give them to the rich. Regardless, if Clinton's policies had stayed in effect at least we would not have the 15 trilllion budget deficit we can see and have now and that would bne a great help. And that is the point! <<That's not true, Koan. The reality is that even Clinton's surpluses weren't real, but I applaud him for his fiscally conservative nature and how far he got us. They looked like surpluses, because our government includes net surpluses from Social Security in their calculations. But if you remove those, then even the Clinton surpluses were actually deficits. And now, with 10,000 Baby Boomers retiring every day, there are no Social Security surpluses. Entitlement spending is now outstripping cash inflows, which is making total government deficits yawn much larger. It's part of why it is unfair to blame Obama for the size of our deficits. They are not all his fault, because there are structural things in place like the Bush tax cuts and the Entitlement spending that is outstripping inflows that is making it so large.