Toro
Diamond Member
The budgets under Clinton were in surplus in his last years. This is not debatable.
A deficit is not defined as an increase in debt. A deficit is defined as expenditures exceeding revenues. Extrapolating a deficit because debt increases is flat out wrong.
How can debt increase without expenditures exceeding revenues?
In the accounting for the federal government, SS receipts are credited to the US Treasury and debited to the SS accounts. They offset. If one is viewing gross debt, all one will see is the rise in debt owed by the US Treasury. That's what you are seeing when you see an increase in US debt above. But this is misleading when looking at the fiscal balance of the entire government because the assets of the SS trusts also rise. Netting the two out - total debt less total assets - gives a truer picture of government indebtedness. Total net debt - liabilities less assets - declined at the end of the 90s.
If the value of your house rises by X and you take out a HELOC worth 0.5X to pay off 0.5X in credit card debt, your net balance has not deteriorated. Your total net debt has not worsened. But if you judge your fiscal balance based solely on your mortgage debt, it looks like you are in worse shape. That's wrong. Looking solely at total US debt is like looking at only at your mortgage debt without considering anything else.
Last edited: