Quote:
|
you have your opinions. My opinions are based on half of what I see and half of what I hear. I HOPE Obama can change and there's no disputing the fact that when Clinton was pres we were better off
|
It's not really an opinion. I can prove my "opinion" with hard data from the US Treasury.
One only needs to know what a budget is to understand what a budget surplus is.
Quote:
|
Budget (from french bougette, purse) generally refers to a list of all planned expenses and revenues. A budget is an important concept in microeconomics, which uses a budget line to illustrate the trade-offs between two or more goods. In other terms, a budget is an organizational plan stated in monetary terms.
|
You can go look at the national debt at the US treasury website for each fiscal year Clinton was in office. To his credit he didn't have the massive deficit spending of previous presidents, nor the massive deficit from Bush II.
The "90s" were good because of 2 things. Little deficit spending (cold war was over) and the dot.com bubble.
The idea that there was a "surplus" during his years is nothing more than people not reading the "budget" in "budget surplus". People look at the world "surplus" and think the government took in more then it spent while not noticing that the national debt increased a bit during those years.
Let's look at it this way. If you spent $10 on scratch off tickets and won 8 dollars, did you REALLY win? That's basically Clinton in the 1990s. He didn't do the type of damage Bush II did, but there still was some deficit spending and he did come very close to balancing the budget. I'd say Bush II was winning 8 dollars after buying $100 dollars in scratch offs.
Yes we did have it very good in the 1990s but Clinton had NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to do with the tech bubble of the 1990s. The government didn't pump capital into all those dot.coms that made their investors rich overnight and boosted the entire economy. He also had nothing to do with it when the market corrected itself and these internet millionaires became poor as fast as they became rich and the economy felt the bubble pop.
It's funny how they take credit for the highs but never for the lows.
