Our nations economic problem

[avatar4321]

I'm listening to Glenn Beck right now and he is talking about the economic problems that face this nation. Last night, he had basically the chief accountant of the United States on. When there is a video up I will post it. But I think this economic problem is something we need to deal with.

Ron Paul may sound crazy on some issues. and I dont know that his monetary policy is correct, but he is right on bringing the economic problems that face this country to the forefront of the race. We are in serious trouble.

And sadly, if the Democrats win, or if several of the Republicans win. We are likely heading for an economic downfall that will be worse than the Great Depression. Heck, it might be inevitable already. But its going to be something the next President has to deal with.

And if someone like Hillary or Obama wins, their solutions to the problems we face will be more socialism. And that's the largest problem we've been facing to begin with.

[Hagbard Celine]

So no matter what if a Dem gets elected it spells disaster? You're aware that the Republican Bush administration squandered the economic surpluses we achieved under Clinton right?

[avatar4321]

So no matter what if a Dem gets elected it spells disaster? You're aware that the Republican Bush administration squandered the economic surpluses we achieved under Clinton right?

You realize the "surpluses" under Clinton never existed to be squandered don't you?

[Hagbard Celine]

You realize the "surpluses" under Clinton never existed to be squandered don't you?

Whatever helps you sleep at night. :rolleyes:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/

[Classact]

Whatever helps you sleep at night. :rolleyes:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/If you take an objective look at the projections they were equal to the NASDAC buble expectations... I held four shares of stock worth $2,000 during Clinton's surplus and they are worth $20 now. The recession following the Clinton administration followed by 9-11 that cost the national treasury quite a sum, followed by war and natural disasters pretty much did to the projected budgets what the NASDAC bubble did to my 4 shares of fiber optics stock.

I watched the same show from post 1 and agree we have problems, unfunded mandates that are just around the corner and the US is going into recession, perhaps the entire world will go into one? This morning the news was that the housing problem for the poor black folks will possibly destroy what's left of the economy and President Bush is considering giving every citizen a $500 cash tax return to spur the economy... We need some sanity... close the department of education and let the states run education... let NASA take money from the welfare program or give them nothing.... it is insane to continue spending money we don't have!

[avatar4321]

Whatever helps you sleep at night. :rolleyes:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/

Actually, the truth helps me sleep at night very often. Because the truth is what matters.

And the truth is there was no surplus. It was a 10 year projected surplus. It's a number on a piece of paper based on the economy continuing to grow at the same rate.

But the economy wasn't growing at the same rate. Clinton left office in a recession. And It was later learned they were tweaking the numbers better. Add 9/11 and the fact that we have to rebuild a decimated army and intelligence and of course the projections werent right.

The surplus never happened. Simply because a piece of paper says "Hey we can have a surplus if nothing changes between now and 10 years," doesn't mean that the money actually exists.

It didnt exist then. It doesnt exist now. And it wouldnt have existed regardless because the Democrats would have spent it.

[Hagbard Celine]

Actually, the truth helps me sleep at night very often. Because the truth is what matters.

And the truth is there was no surplus. It was a 10 year projected surplus. It's a number on a piece of paper based on the economy continuing to grow at the same rate.

But the economy wasn't growing at the same rate. Clinton left office in a recession. And It was later learned they were tweaking the numbers better. Add 9/11 and the fact that we have to rebuild a decimated army and intelligence and of course the projections werent right.

The surplus never happened. Simply because a piece of paper says "Hey we can have a surplus if nothing changes between now and 10 years," doesn't mean that the money actually exists.

It didnt exist then. It doesnt exist now. And it wouldnt have existed regardless because the Democrats would have spent it.

Like I said. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Keep telling yourself whatever it takes.

[avatar4321]

Like I said. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Keep telling yourself whatever it takes.

It's the truth. Why would I want anything else?

[DrJohn]

Unemployment is on the rise. I guess that's because of Clinton's policies, too.

[Abbey Marie]

Unemployment is on the rise. I guess that's because of Clinton's policies, too.

Nah, we can blame that one on the unions. :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

Unemployment is on the rise. I guess that's because of Clinton's policies, too.

No. its caused by overspending and massive debt by both Democrats and Republicans.

[manu1959]

So no matter what if a Dem gets elected it spells disaster? You're aware that the Republican Bush administration squandered the economic surpluses we achieved under Clinton right?

can you tell me how clinton "created" the surplus.......and was the surplus a trade surpluss, a budget surplus or national debt surplus....

[JohnDoe]

a budget surplus....most of which was coming from SS surplus, i believe?

anyway, can't have it both ways....at the time of the tax cuts, it was TOUTED by the administration and republicans that this surplus or projected surplus ''was the people's money'', therefore they were giving the tax cut to ''give them back, what was theirs....'', so yes, there was further surplusses projected, and the republicans agreed and even ''used'' this so called projected surplus... as a reason for the tax cuts....if memory serves me, so i think that both sides of the aisle used these projected figures when it benefitted themselves...! :)

jd

[manu1959]

a budget surplus....most of which was coming from SS surplus, i believe?

anyway, can't have it both ways....at the time of the tax cuts, it was TOUTED by the administration and republicans that this surplus or projected surplus ''was the people's money'', therefore they were giving the tax cut to ''give them back, what was theirs....'', so yes, there was further surplusses projected, and the republicans agreed and even ''used'' this so called projected surplus... as a reason for the tax cuts....if memory serves me, so i think that both sides of the aisle used these projected figures when it benefitted themselves...! :)

jd

SS surplus? what does that mean exactly? did clinto raise or lower taxes to creat the surplus?.....

[typomaniac]

I'm listening to Glenn Beck right now and he is talking about the economic problems that face this nation. Last night, he had basically the chief accountant of the United States on. When there is a video up I will post it. But I think this economic problem is something we need to deal with.

Ron Paul may sound crazy on some issues. and I dont know that his monetary policy is correct, but he is right on bringing the economic problems that face this country to the forefront of the race. We are in serious trouble.

Yes, it's a real problem, and the people no longer want any part of the Bushies' "solutions."

Your hero George is the ONLY president ever to have started a war and simultaneously cut taxes.

[manu1959]

Yes, it's a real problem, and the people no longer want any part of the Bushies' "solutions."

Your hero George is the ONLY president ever to have started a war and simultaneously cut taxes.

clinton went to war in the balkans without un approval and cut taxes ...

[typomaniac]

clinton went to war in the balkans without un approval and cut taxes ...

After the balkans war started? Don't think so...

[manu1959]

After the balkans war started? Don't think so...

you sure?.....how about somailia?.....rawanda?

[typomaniac]

you sure?.....how about somailia?.....rawanda?

Pretty sure. Somalia was Daddy Bush's war. And Rwanda was all UN (and maybe a few Belgian troops too; I forget).

[manu1959]

Pretty sure. Somalia was Daddy Bush's war. And Rwanda was all UN (and maybe a few Belgian troops too; I forget).

the us troops were pulled out of rawanda by MA and big bill....if i am not mistaken.....sorry didn't mean to type somalia....

[typomaniac]

the us troops were pulled out of rawanda by MA and big bill....if i am not mistaken.....sorry didn't mean to type somalia....

I thought the Rwanda pullout was the US contingent within the UN forces, but I could be mistaken there, too.

[avatar4321]

Yes, it's a real problem, and the people no longer want any part of the Bushies' "solutions."

Your hero George is the ONLY president ever to have started a war and simultaneously cut taxes.

and by doing so has increased revenues by stimulating the economy. The problem isnt cutting taxes. the problem is the increase of spending. Particularly for non-military spending.

[manu1959]

I thought the Rwanda pullout was the US contingent within the UN forces, but I could be mistaken there, too.

you are correct.....we left the belgians and the rawandans to fend for themselves....it was the policy clinton developed after he pulled our "un" troops out of somalia.....

[typomaniac]

and by doing so has increased revenues by stimulating the economy. The problem isnt cutting taxes. the problem is the increase of spending. Particularly for non-military spending.

Yeah, and look where the market is now. :lol:

[avatar4321]

Pretty sure. Somalia was Daddy Bush's war. And Rwanda was all UN (and maybe a few Belgian troops too; I forget).

So I guess the Black Hawk Down incident during Clinton's administration never happened?

[avatar4321]

Yeah, and look where the market is now. :lol:

And the problem is overspending in government.. The government already takes a third of your paycheck. Do you really think it needs more?

[typomaniac]

So I guess the Black Hawk Down incident during Clinton's administration never happened?

No, it's just too unimportant in terms of financial cost to have any impact on the argument at hand.

[manu1959]

Yeah, and look where the market is now. :lol:

the stock market?

what was the dow today? 8 years ago?

[typomaniac]

And the problem is overspending in government.. The government already takes a third of your paycheck. Do you really think it needs more?

I support the idea of keeping deficits small-to-nonexistent as much as you do. And yet you and others insist on electing officials who do anything but.

[manu1959]

No, it's just too unimportant in terms of financial cost to have any impact on the argument at hand.

it was a "war" we withdrew.....it set up clinton's policy of non-involvement in world issues....which is why he pulled troops out of rawanda and did not help in darfur.....but for some odd reason went into the balkans....and he did cut taxes during this period to stimulate big business .... he was fortunate to be pres during the second industrial revolution which provided the tax base for the surplus and closed several military bases and defered the clean up and decomissioning cost till well now....treasure island, mare island, hunters point, alameda, tustin....just to name a few....

[typomaniac]

it was a "war" we withdrew.....it set up clinton's policy of non-involvement in world issues....which is why he pulled troops out of rawanda and did not help in darfur.....but for some odd reason went into the balkans....and he did cut taxes during this period to stimulate big business .... he was fortunate to be pres during the second industrial revolution which provided the tax base for the surplus and closed several military bases and defered the clean up and decomissioning cost till well now....treasure island, mare island, hunters point, alameda, tustin....just to name a few....

Seems to be an odd thing for a self-proclaimed "isolationist" to be criticizing.

[manu1959]

I support the idea of keeping deficits small-to-nonexistent as much as you do. And yet you and others insist on electing officials who do anything but.

the house and senate create budgets and spending bills....not the pres.....

these folks have been fiscally irresponsible every since they created income tax....

[manu1959]

Seems to be an odd thing for a self-proclaimed "isolationist" to be criticizing.

really.....which thing did i criticize.....seeems you are seeing words i did not type....

[typomaniac]

the house and senate create budgets and spending bills....not the pres.....
Most of which don't have enough support to override a veto. :lame2:


these folks have been fiscally irresponsible every since they created income tax....And they still get re-elected because...?

[manu1959]

Most of which don't have enough support to override a veto. :lame2:

And they still get re-elected because...?

no idea i have been voting against my reps for as long as i can remember.... someone else keeps voting them in .....

if you are refering to bush's vetos......not sure he has vetoed any recent pork spending bill....don't recall clinton or bush I or reagan or carter or ford or nixon making a fuss either .... they all spend like drunken sailors.....

[JohnDoe]

SS surplus? what does that mean exactly? did clinto raise or lower taxes to creat the surplus?.....
all SS funds collected, by law, goes in to the general treasury.....the same revenue fund as internal revenue collections, basically....and the same fund congress uses as their funds to spend, and the same fund that the president uses to present to Congress "his budget".....

as example, if the ss funds collected were in surplus of $110 billion once all eligible SS retirements are paid out....that money is being used by congress to pay for what income taxes should be paying....and an IOU is basically writen for using it....raising our national debt....in simple terms...

so, although it is being reported that we are only budget deficit spending $300 billion a year as was the case for 2005 i think, we were really over spending $410 billion a year because we used the SS surplus monies collected for the boomers when their ss retirements peak...

clinton raised and lowered taxes while he was in office....

the economic boom, along with clinton's fiscal policies, along with the restraint of congressional spending contributed to bringing our budget deficit spending down, thus creating a budget surplus....(ss surplus monies which were getting larger each year, also helped, and they are near double in size now compared to the early clinton years)

jd

[manu1959]

all SS funds collected, by law, goes in to the general treasury.....the same revenue fund as internal revenue collections, basically....and the same fund congress uses as their funds to spend, and the same fund that the president uses to present to Congress "his budget".....

as example, if the ss funds collected were in surplus of $110 billion once all eligible SS retirements are paid out....that money is being used by congress to pay for what income taxes should be paying....and an IOU is basically writen for using it....raising our national debt....in simple terms...

so, although it is being reported that we are only budget deficit spending $300 billion a year as was the case for 2005 i think, we were really over spending $410 billion a year because we used the SS surplus monies collected for the boomers when their ss retirements peak...

clinton raised and lowered taxes while he was in office....

the economic boom, along with clinton's fiscal policies, along with the restraint of congressional spending contributed to bringing our budget deficit spending down, thus creating a budget surplus....(ss surplus monies which were getting larger each year, also helped, and they are near double in size now compared to the early clinton years)

jd

so clinton counted funds he shouldn't have ?

[JohnDoe]

so clinton counted funds he shouldn't have ?
by LAW he had to count them, just as Bush is counting them in on his budgets....people were touting a ''lock box'', but was never done....

2 years clinton/with congress, did have a surplus over and above the SS surplus funds i believe.....?


jd

[red states rule]

So no matter what if a Dem gets elected it spells disaster? You're aware that the Republican Bush administration squandered the economic surpluses we achieved under Clinton right?

It would be an economic disaster. Dems want to raise income taxes, the capital gaines tax, social security tax, and corporate income taxs

Meanwhile they want to expand government programs, and have a government run health care system

[red states rule]

Yeah, and look where the market is now. :lol:

Yea, the Dow was up 7% last year.

And look where it was one week after 9-11 and the $1 trillion hit on the US economy

[red states rule]

Unemployment is on the rise. I guess that's because of Clinton's policies, too.

A 95% employment rate is a pretty good rate