Anyone want to help me argue against "the surplus never existed"?

[redqueen]

Has anyone heard of this rule change re: counting social security receipts in the budget?


"The 'surplus' you speak of was a sham that both political parties willingly foisted on the voters. The surplus was actually based on the fact that they counted Social Security receipts in the budget. Without the influx of money from SS (and other cook-the-book tricks), we would've been running in the red during the 90's, same as always. It was politically expedient for both Donkey-Punchers and Repubelicans to crow about the great and awesome surplus, a surplus that never existed.

Slick Willy was a spendaholic who wanted to spread federal bunk in retarded fashion, just like every other president (remember midnight basketball, the pork-laden 1993 stimulus package?) The only sort of fiscal discipline Billy-Boy ever had was imposed upon him by the GOP Congress that took over in 1994. Even that phenomenon can be chalked up less to ideology than political realities; gridlock between Democrat Bill and Republican Congress meant that spending had to go down.

Besides I'm a Milton Friedman disciple. Deficits by themselves don't scare me; it's when the percentage of deficit as it relates to GDP goes bonkers that economies start to tank. We're nohwere near 1929, 1987, 1990-91 or 1920's Germany. While I'm annoyed about Bush's spending, it's not for the reasons you might think."

[Ready4Change]

1. If it never existed then tax cuts were an even WORSE idea. n/t

[Dark]

2. They've always spent SS money on other things.

this isn't new.

Besides, what do you expect them to do with income?

[Nitrogenica]

3. Does it have anything to do with this (national debt).?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Bush has borrowed more money than all the previous presidents combined.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200511/NAT20051104b.html

If one borrows a huge amount of money, you could make the case that your economy is doing very well. Sooner or later the loan shark is going to came calling.

How does this strategy compare to Bill Clinton's attempts to balance the budget without giving huge tax cuts to rich people while trying to maintain some sense of humanity as to what programs get cut.

[LuckyTheDog]

4. Not really true

At least one point, the current account surplus would have existed without the SS money (though it would have been smaller). But the bottom line is that the government WAS taking in more than it was spending. That's why it was called a CURRENT ACCOUNT surplus.

In previous years, the SS money was used to make GOP deficits looks smaller. So, it is fair to use the same yardstick for Clinton. So long as everyone knows what the yardstick is made of, it is not dishonest.

[patdem]

5. Does this statement still stand when you take SocSec out of the deficit?

Besides I'm a Milton Friedman disciple. Deficits by themselves don't scare me; it's when the percentage of deficit as it relates to GDP goes bonkers that economies start to tank. We're nohwere near 1929, 1987, 1990-91 or 1920's Germany. While I'm annoyed about Bush's spending, it's not for the reasons you might think."

He implies he is an equal opportunity basher, then goes on and complains about midnight basketball yes says nothing about the OUTRAGEOUS medicare spending boondoggle!

[robbedvoter]

6. Maybe drawing a picture (a bit old I'm afraid)

[BillZBubb]

7. This guy is a moron, don't waste your time.

The 1993 stimulus package was miniscule. Any nitwit that tries to compare that to the incredibly huge wasteful spending of Reagan or Bush is a fool or a tool.

If deficits don't scare him based on some artificial percentage of GDP he is truly a dimwit. Deficits are cumulative drags on the economy. They keep piling the debt load. Because of the Reagan, Bush 1, and now Bush 2 deficits, this country has to generate an additional $300 Billion/year in tax revenues JUST TO PAY INTEREST on the debt! And that number keeps on growing.

Don't waste your time on this guy.

[obreaslan]

8. I agree...

I automatically discount anyone referring to "Slick Willie". It's not worth the effort, they are too far gone into ditto world. :freak: :crazy: