Topic: Were we or were we not in a surplus during the Clinton years?
Cathy !TGirlYJKXM started this discussion 14 years ago #21,390
I was led to believe we were, but I heard plenty say we weren't.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #340,758
we were
Meta !PARAdoxiHw joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,763
We were, look it up.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,764
Yes, but it was because of the Republican Congress. lol
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,765
But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erasedhttp://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/
(Edited 34 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,766
Yes, but with a republican-controlled Congress passing budgets.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,767
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
So current Republican controlled congress is also responsible for: $15,958 TRILLION DEFICIT.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
So current Republican controlled congress is also responsible for: $15,958 TRILLION DEFICIT.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,771
It strikes me as odd that the Republican-controlled congress under Bush (with many of the same members who were serving in the Republican-controlled congress under Clinton) managed to screw the pooch so badly once one of their own was in the White House. I'm pretty sure that the "Yeah, but Republicans controlled congress" answer doesn't really make sense by itself.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,773
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,774
@340,771 (G)
I wasn't implying that the republican-controlled congress was responsible for the budget surplus. I just.wanted to discourage the claim that Clinton was a better president than Bush/Reagan/Whoever because he had a budget surplus and they didn't.
I wasn't implying that the republican-controlled congress was responsible for the budget surplus. I just.wanted to discourage the claim that Clinton was a better president than Bush/Reagan/Whoever because he had a budget surplus and they didn't.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #340,775
@previous (F)
Of course, there are a huge number of political, economic, and social factors that go into it all. I was just trying to head off the flip side of that argument. Trying to boil it down to just one "side" is the kind of lame argument better left to talk radio hosts.
Of course, there are a huge number of political, economic, and social factors that go into it all. I was just trying to head off the flip side of that argument. Trying to boil it down to just one "side" is the kind of lame argument better left to talk radio hosts.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #340,776
@340,774 (F)
@previous (G)
Of course the fact that not a single 9-11 Al Qaeda asshole, came from or in fact had ever been to Iraq. War War what is it good for?
Beginning of the End of USA as super power.
@previous (G)
Of course the fact that not a single 9-11 Al Qaeda asshole, came from or in fact had ever been to Iraq. War War what is it good for?
Beginning of the End of USA as super power.