Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Industrial Drive
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Total Points: 2,000,149,861,985.69
Well that's certainly the best case scenario if one were to spin it. Of course someone of Stewart's ilk would spin it even further and credit the higher taxes on the rich during the Clinton years, for the "good times"....which as you said had nothing to do with the low unemployment rate. It's the "Good Times" themselves from the Free Market, that gave them the revenue to balance budgets. The higher taxes on the rich was just icing on the cake....which the Democrats use to this day as a way to get us back to a 90's Economy.
Originally Posted by Nodogoshi
In fact, Stewart's point wasn't entirely wrong, but he got it mixed up (I'm sure because someone else told it to him and he never really understood). What he might've been attempting to get at was the projection that if the Clinton surplus would've been maintained the deficit would've been eliminated.
But, this point is also counter-factual. The budget surplus/deficits are also very affected by macroeconomic conditions. When times are good, tax revenues are higher. This was basically what created the Clinton surplus. It is also probably the most problematic circumstance with respect to the currently rising debt.
And I disagree with your last sentence. It's not the most problematic thing. The problematic thing is SPENDING and BIG GOVT, which are getting in the way of the "good times" anyway. We've had "good times" all throughout history, and the majority of those good times happened when we had a much smaller Government to begin with... and true Capitalism reigned supreme. We've since then abused those "good times" in the Private Sector, and used it to increase Government spending because we could get away with it. Well... time has caught up and it's now time to get off of the "Mixed Economy" where the private sector pays for a bloated public sector, and get back to pure Capitalism Economy...without the yearly Trillion dollar spending.
Bush did the right thing in cutting taxes, what he did wrong was not cutting spending to accommodate those tax cuts. That's where he failed and discredited the good name of "Fiscal Conservatism". To the point that those who are actually serious about shrinking Govt. have to call themselves Libertarians, just to not be linked to Bush style Conservatism.
Last edited by 0ne_Capitalist; 10-28-2012 at 03:51 AM.