Question about the debt and concerns over Obama/Clinton
Posted February 16th, 2008 by Adam0980
output
I wish not to incite argument here. I just have a question I was thinking about and I thought I'd raise.
I am no real fan of the Obama or Clinton either. And it seems the biggest concern over them is there interest in more government action, big government, etc. I share that concern as well.
Anyway, on the other hand, I often think about this. Everything else aside, I remember one time during Clinton's Administration (sometime around 99 or 2000) the national debt actually began to go DOWN. Im from NYC and on 42nd and 5th avenue there use to be (it was moved) a huge sign showing and calculating the debt. One day it started to go down. They actually shut if off because it just kept going and going down. Does anybody remember this time period?
The reason I raise this is that it would thus seem conceivable that with either of those candidates I may be able to at least take some comfort in that economic decisions could be made that are at least sane and not outright loony.
Any thoughts? And if I'm missing some information, please inform me as well.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Social Security
Was robbed to fake the balanced budget. So it was just faked. The debt did NOT go down either.. another illusion. You have to be kidding. Walltstreet is going into hysteria over the thought of Hillary or Obama winning.
Yes, I remember.
Clinton inherited a super economy and build up military. All of which Bush and Neo-Cons have destroyed. Yes, Hillory is a crook, but I look at it this way. All of them except Ron Paul are crooks, so there is no difference.
If Obama will get us out of Iraq then more power to him. Hillory can't win because of her vote on Iraq. Obama will be the next president if Ron Paul is not the Republican Nominee. I will bet anyone $$ on this.
All I know is this. I won't vote for McCain.
It may be shallow but my #1 issue is the drug war.
If someone can get that right then they have enough heart to get other things right.
http://video.google.com/v...
http://video.google.com/v...
This doesn't talk about economy, but it does talk about democracy as opposed to a republic. 1/2-hr video, enjoy.
I have heard this before, as
I have heard this before, as well, and it seems that I have recently saw a graph to that effect as well, although it now escapes me where I saw it. However, the Clinton presidency was a long time ago and even if he DID have something to do with the debt decreasing, the policies of both Democratic candidates are virtually identical when it comes to spending. According to a study by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF), the research arm of the 362,000-member National Taxpayers Union, a nonpartisan citizen group founded in 1969 that works for lower taxes and tax reform, here are some figures on spending proposals by various candidates, with Ron Paul being the ONLY candidate who would actually reduce spending:
# John McCain´s proposals would result in a $6.9 billion spending hike.
# Mike Huckabee´s proposals would result in a $54.2 billion spending hike.
As for the Democrats:
# Hillary Clinton´s proposals would result in a $218.2 billion spending hike.
# Barack Obama´s proposals would result in a $287.0 billion spending hike..
So Barack Obama's proposals would result in a spending hike that is FIVE TIMES that of Mr. Tax Mike Huckabee. WOW. This country's demise will REALLY accelerate under a Democratic Presidency, especially with a Democratic Congress to grease the way.
www.paulforronpaul.com
See maybe I am just too
See maybe I am just too naive or ignorant, but I believe Obama and Clinton and pretty much most people have something McCain, Bush, etc. have. They are not zealots. Obama and Clinton probably propose those policies because they believe it will do good things. Once it doesn't I really don't see the insanity like we have seen recently. I would see some at least some recognition of a mistake and an attempt to shift and possibly change. I mean I believe they are just stupid and corrupt to whatever degree people in power are. But they are not sick, twisted people. McCain, Huck, and the rest I see as that. They are zealots. They will do what they believe in till death.
Huh?
You don't think HIllary is sick or twisted??? Wow, where have you been? This is a woman who stole 900 FBI files and had Sandy Berger steal top secret documents and smuggle them out in his socks to protect her husband for being blamed for signing the Iraq policy. YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING.
Hillary is the poster child for being sick AND twisted.
No, that is corrupt what you
No, that is corrupt what you describe. She is corrupt which I said. That is not sick. If it is anything besides corrupt it is fear, but she is not sick. Sick is how John McCain acts. For example, the faces he makes in the debates or that smug, vile, arrogant smile he always has or disrespectful way he interacts with other people are sick, horrible ways of behaving. That is sick. You could compare that to Hillary's constant fake laughing early on her TV interview. She fake laughs instead being smug becomes she has at least has some decent sense of humanity. I'm sorry but there is a difference. John McCain is sick...sick like psychologically fucked up. He doesn't give a damn about anyone else at all. You don't see that aura of hate in him? He is evil. Clinton is just corrupt and a fake and does really idiotic things, but she still has a sense of humanity. McCain doesn't. Forget what they say people. It's BS. Read them as a whole person. What are they saying and how are they saying it. You will see Clinton is just a corrupt person. McCain is an altogether appalling person.
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!
The reason for the economic boom in the 90's is complicated and for me to summarize without writing a book will be tough.
First the economic expansion started in 1982 when Reagan's first budget was underway. This was after awful times in the 70's where we almost went under as a country. The implosion of the USSR by which the Reagan administration successfully bankrupt causing a significant drawdown of the military complex which started under daddy Bush, but was delayed because of the first gulf war. BRAC contributed heavily into reducing the DOD budgets also.
Clinton inherited a golden opportunity to right many wrongs but blew it when in 1994 the Republicans took over the House. This caused "gridlock" and kept the Clinton's from running up huge debt. Those budget showdowns did more to promote the expansion in the nineties then any other event. The republicans were acting like budget hawks and actually had a great plan to start the country on the right path. This is why RP keeps saying the Republican Party has lost it's way as they out spend Democrats now.
The expansion ended in 1999-2000, so it would be easy to make the claim Ronald Reagan started the economic expansion and Bill Clinton ended it.
Baby Bush as only made things worse with his personal war with Iraq.
WAKE UP AMERICA
KT
NONE of the candidates apart
NONE of the candidates apart from Ron Paul are making ANY sense whatsoever economically. Socialized medicine?!?! More policing the world or continue warfare?!?!? We are BROKE man. BANKRUPT! NO MORE MONEY!!! We are 9 trillion in the hole not including social security/medicare benefits owed to the 77 million baby boomers that started retiring Jan 1st of this year. The ONLY thing that makes ANY sense whatsoever is to CUT SPENDING!!! We don't have the manufacturing capacity to work our way out of debt, the dollar is on its very last legs and these idiots are talking about increasing the budget?!?! Where do they plan on getting the money for all this outrageous stuff they are proposing? Let the Fed create more of it out of thin air?! That devaluates it even further and pushes the international markets away from our currency and more towards participation in the Bourse :)
Hey, dude
I get ya. I hear ya. I am just pointing out this fact. I thought it was kind of interesting. During Clinton's administration, the debt actually went down. Don't you find that interesting?
You better study
the difference between the deficit and the debt. Deficit is yearly budget excesses or shorcomings. The debt is accrued total money owed to the private bank called the federal reserve corporation.
No I know the difference.
No I know the difference. The deficit is if the yearly budget is over spent. I know. The debt is the national total debt. What are you saying though? The debt went down. I promise you. Look into it.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but...
My understanding is Clinton took / stole money from the social security fund to make his debt / deficit look better.
Bingo!
Giave that man/woman a cigar!
Obama just proposed this bill to tax us and send money to the UN:
http://www.gopusa.com/com...
Tell me he's not on the global government bandwagon.