Myth of the Clinton surplus

[Mr Natural]

No surplus?

Then where did those $300 George Bush rebate checks come from?

 

[healthmyths]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]6-GlExX6sqw[/MEDIA] Clinton's Big Budget Surplus Debunked - YouTube[/ame]

No myth.

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut

President Bush said Saturday that the most important number in the budget he sends to Congress next week is the $5.6 trillion surplus it projects over the next 10 years.

That huge projected surplus provides the underpinning of all the administration's tax-cut and spending plans, Mr. Bush said in his recorded weekly radio address.

You republicans only started calling it a myth after you squandered it in Iraq and on tax breaks to the rich.

You used the surplus as justification for tax breaks. That means either you were lying in 2001 or now. Which is it?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

Still, Hoyer left out enough qualifiers --
that the number was a projection,
and that it covered 10 years --
that we believe viewers would take away an exaggerated impression of the fiscal picture Bush inherited. So we’re giving Hoyer’s comment a rating of Half True.
Steny Hoyer says George W. Bush inherited $5.6 trillion surplus from Bill Clinton

NOW here is the ACTUAL Revenue, expenses and deficit that was triggered by the FALSE surplus of Clinton!

NOTE in 2001 there was $1,991,082,000,000 in revenues and $1,862,846,000 outlays leaving a surplus of $128,236,000,000.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED in 2001?
Dot.com bust that had $8 Trillion in market losses...
$8 Trillion in dot.com losses meant the following:
The Labor Department estimates that a net 1.735 million jobs were shed in 2001, with an additional net 508,000 lost during 2002. 2003 saw a small gain of a mere 105,000 jobs. Unemployment rose from 4.2% in February 2001 to 5.5% in November 2001, but did not peak until June 2003 at 6.3%, after which it declined to 5% by mid-2005.
Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia
In 2000, the dot-com bubble burst, destroying $6.2 trillion in household wealth over the next two years.
Five years later, the housing market crashed, and from 2007 to 2009, the value of real estate owned by U.S. households fell by nearly the same amount — $6 trillion.
Adjusted to 2009 dollars, the dot-com crash led to losses of $9 trillion and the real estate crash to losses of $7.1 trillion.

Why the Housing Bubble Tanked the Economy And the Tech Bubble Didn’t
Now I'm sure DUMMIES like you don't have this issue BUT if you have to pay Federal income taxes AND you have a LOSS i.e. like these investors did $8 Trillion in market
losses... YOU WRITE off those as losses and THEREFORE most like pay little or maybe NONE in taxes.
This is what happened in 2002,2003,2004,2005,2006, etc.

So those $8 Trillion in losses MEAN REDUCED Income tax revenue but dummies like you are so stupid!
THEN dummies like YOU FORGOT 9/11 occurred.
But of course this is too detailed. Too FACTUAL for dummies like you to comprehend...
To sum it up for you idiots........THERE NEVER WAS AN ACTUAL $5.6 trillion sitting in the Federal bank or SURPLUS!!! IT WAS ALL PROJECTIONS without the
below events happening!

GEEZ you dummies are just pathetic!

 

[healthmyths]

No surplus?

Then where did those $300 George Bush rebate checks come from?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

Still, Hoyer left out enough qualifiers --
that the number was a projection,
and that it covered 10 years --
that we believe viewers would take away an exaggerated impression of the fiscal picture Bush inherited. So we’re giving Hoyer’s comment a rating of Half True.
Steny Hoyer says George W. Bush inherited $5.6 trillion surplus from Bill Clinton

NOW here is the ACTUAL Revenue, expenses and deficit that was triggered by the FALSE surplus of Clinton!

NOTE in 2001 there was $1,991,082,000,000 in revenues and $1,862,846,000 outlays leaving a surplus of $128,236,000,000.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED in 2001?
Dot.com bust that had $8 Trillion in market losses...
$8 Trillion in dot.com losses meant the following:
The Labor Department estimates that a net 1.735 million jobs were shed in 2001, with an additional net 508,000 lost during 2002. 2003 saw a small gain of a mere 105,000 jobs. Unemployment rose from 4.2% in February 2001 to 5.5% in November 2001, but did not peak until June 2003 at 6.3%, after which it declined to 5% by mid-2005.
Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia
In 2000, the dot-com bubble burst, destroying $6.2 trillion in household wealth over the next two years.
Five years later, the housing market crashed, and from 2007 to 2009, the value of real estate owned by U.S. households fell by nearly the same amount — $6 trillion.
Adjusted to 2009 dollars, the dot-com crash led to losses of $9 trillion and the real estate crash to losses of $7.1 trillion.

Why the Housing Bubble Tanked the Economy And the Tech Bubble Didn’t
Now I'm sure DUMMIES like you don't have this issue BUT if you have to pay Federal income taxes AND you have a LOSS i.e. like these investors did $8 Trillion in market
losses... YOU WRITE off those as losses and THEREFORE most like pay little or maybe NONE in taxes.
This is what happened in 2002,2003,2004,2005,2006, etc.

So those $8 Trillion in losses MEAN REDUCED Income tax revenue but dummies like you are so stupid!
THEN dummies like YOU FORGOT 9/11 occurred.
But of course this is too detailed. Too FACTUAL for dummies like you to comprehend...
To sum it up for you idiots........THERE NEVER WAS AN ACTUAL $5.6 trillion sitting in the Federal bank or SURPLUS!!! IT WAS ALL PROJECTIONS without the
below events happening!

GEEZ you dummies are just pathetic!

 

[sealybobo]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]6-GlExX6sqw[/MEDIA] Clinton's Big Budget Surplus Debunked - YouTube[/ame]

No myth.

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut

President Bush said Saturday that the most important number in the budget he sends to Congress next week is the $5.6 trillion surplus it projects over the next 10 years.

That huge projected surplus provides the underpinning of all the administration's tax-cut and spending plans, Mr. Bush said in his recorded weekly radio address.

You republicans only started calling it a myth after you squandered it in Iraq and on tax breaks to the rich.

You used the surplus as justification for tax breaks. That means either you were lying in 2001 or now. Which is it?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

Still, Hoyer left out enough qualifiers --
that the number was a projection,
and that it covered 10 years --
that we believe viewers would take away an exaggerated impression of the fiscal picture Bush inherited. So we’re giving Hoyer’s comment a rating of Half True.
Steny Hoyer says George W. Bush inherited $5.6 trillion surplus from Bill Clinton

NOW here is the ACTUAL Revenue, expenses and deficit that was triggered by the FALSE surplus of Clinton!

NOTE in 2001 there was $1,991,082,000,000 in revenues and $1,862,846,000 outlays leaving a surplus of $128,236,000,000.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED in 2001?
Dot.com bust that had $8 Trillion in market losses...
$8 Trillion in dot.com losses meant the following:
The Labor Department estimates that a net 1.735 million jobs were shed in 2001, with an additional net 508,000 lost during 2002. 2003 saw a small gain of a mere 105,000 jobs. Unemployment rose from 4.2% in February 2001 to 5.5% in November 2001, but did not peak until June 2003 at 6.3%, after which it declined to 5% by mid-2005.
Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia
In 2000, the dot-com bubble burst, destroying $6.2 trillion in household wealth over the next two years.
Five years later, the housing market crashed, and from 2007 to 2009, the value of real estate owned by U.S. households fell by nearly the same amount — $6 trillion.
Adjusted to 2009 dollars, the dot-com crash led to losses of $9 trillion and the real estate crash to losses of $7.1 trillion.

Why the Housing Bubble Tanked the Economy And the Tech Bubble Didn’t
Now I'm sure DUMMIES like you don't have this issue BUT if you have to pay Federal income taxes AND you have a LOSS i.e. like these investors did $8 Trillion in market
losses... YOU WRITE off those as losses and THEREFORE most like pay little or maybe NONE in taxes.
This is what happened in 2002,2003,2004,2005,2006, etc.

So those $8 Trillion in losses MEAN REDUCED Income tax revenue but dummies like you are so stupid!
THEN dummies like YOU FORGOT 9/11 occurred.
But of course this is too detailed. Too FACTUAL for dummies like you to comprehend...
To sum it up for you idiots........THERE NEVER WAS AN ACTUAL $5.6 trillion sitting in the Federal bank or SURPLUS!!! IT WAS ALL PROJECTIONS without the
below events happening!

GEEZ you dummies are just pathetic!


View attachment 219109

Yea, so if things stayed the same we would have had that surplus in 2010. But, Bush squandered that projected surplus. He said if there is a surplus it should go back to the people who paid the taxes.

Then he got hit on 9-11 and lied us into Iraq so Chaney's haloburton could get that surplus, dummy.

 

[sealybobo]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]6-GlExX6sqw[/MEDIA] Clinton's Big Budget Surplus Debunked - YouTube[/ame]

No myth.

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut

President Bush said Saturday that the most important number in the budget he sends to Congress next week is the $5.6 trillion surplus it projects over the next 10 years.

That huge projected surplus provides the underpinning of all the administration's tax-cut and spending plans, Mr. Bush said in his recorded weekly radio address.

You republicans only started calling it a myth after you squandered it in Iraq and on tax breaks to the rich.

You used the surplus as justification for tax breaks. That means either you were lying in 2001 or now. Which is it?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

View attachment 219109

I did say it was a projected surplus. I didn't say we had $5.6 trillion sitting in a bank account did I?

But Bush used the PROJECTED Surplus to do all kinds of spending and to give tax breaks. So he fucked up. Bill Clinton had us on the right path.

So did Obama. Trumps tax break wasn't necessary either.

 

[healthmyths]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]6-GlExX6sqw[/MEDIA] Clinton's Big Budget Surplus Debunked - YouTube[/ame]

No myth.

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut

President Bush said Saturday that the most important number in the budget he sends to Congress next week is the $5.6 trillion surplus it projects over the next 10 years.

That huge projected surplus provides the underpinning of all the administration's tax-cut and spending plans, Mr. Bush said in his recorded weekly radio address.

You republicans only started calling it a myth after you squandered it in Iraq and on tax breaks to the rich.

You used the surplus as justification for tax breaks. That means either you were lying in 2001 or now. Which is it?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

View attachment 219109

I did say it was a projected surplus. I didn't say we had $5.6 trillion sitting in a bank account did I?

But Bush used the PROJECTED Surplus to do all kinds of spending and to give tax breaks. So he fucked up. Bill Clinton had us on the right path.

So did Obama. Trumps tax break wasn't necessary either.

NO he DIDN"T!
Read the facts as to what happened!
GWB and experts KNEW there was a RECESSION coming in 2001!

FACT: Predictions that the bubble would burst emerged during the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s. Predictions about a future burst increased following the October 27, 1997 mini-crash, in the wake of the Asian crisis. This caused an uncertain economic climate during the first few months of 1998. However conditions improved, and the Federal Reserve raised interest rates six times between June 1999 and May 2000 in an effort to cool the economy to achieve a soft landing. The burst of the stock market bubble occurred in the form of the NASDAQ crash in March 2000. Growth in gross domestic product slowed considerably in the third quarter of 2000 to the lowest rate since a contraction in the first quarter of 1992.[3]
The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee has determined that a peak in business activity occurred in the U.S. economy in March 2001. A peak marks the end of an expansion and the beginning of a recession. The determination of a peak date in March is thus a determination that the expansion that began in March 1992 ended in March 2001 and a recession began.Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia

So GWB and experts KNEW this would require incentives.
BUT NO ONE KNEW about 9/11 or the worst hurricane SEASONS!
If you truly want to the facts READ what happened during GWB presidency!

These events cost trillions and the point of the TAX cuts was knowing this recession was coming... a way to incentivize economic growth.
WHICH it did!
Did you look at the chart I submitted of Federal Revenue and expenditures?
Did you note that when the tax cuts came into play in 2004,etc REVENUE started to increase.

 

[basquebromance]

One woman can change the world. One woman did change the world.

 

[healthmyths]

One woman can change the world. One woman did change the world.

If you mean Ms. Ford, how do you know that SHE was telling the truth it was Kavanaugh and maybe someone else?
Remember she couldn't remember who brought to the party or took her home as she was not legally able to drive.
Also she didn't know where the house was.
No, the world didn't change because of her.

 

[sealybobo]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]6-GlExX6sqw[/MEDIA] Clinton's Big Budget Surplus Debunked - YouTube[/ame]

No myth.

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut

President Bush said Saturday that the most important number in the budget he sends to Congress next week is the $5.6 trillion surplus it projects over the next 10 years.

That huge projected surplus provides the underpinning of all the administration's tax-cut and spending plans, Mr. Bush said in his recorded weekly radio address.

You republicans only started calling it a myth after you squandered it in Iraq and on tax breaks to the rich.

You used the surplus as justification for tax breaks. That means either you were lying in 2001 or now. Which is it?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

View attachment 219109

I did say it was a projected surplus. I didn't say we had $5.6 trillion sitting in a bank account did I?

But Bush used the PROJECTED Surplus to do all kinds of spending and to give tax breaks. So he fucked up. Bill Clinton had us on the right path.

So did Obama. Trumps tax break wasn't necessary either.

NO he DIDN"T!
Read the facts as to what happened!
GWB and experts KNEW there was a RECESSION coming in 2001!

FACT: Predictions that the bubble would burst emerged during the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s. Predictions about a future burst increased following the October 27, 1997 mini-crash, in the wake of the Asian crisis. This caused an uncertain economic climate during the first few months of 1998. However conditions improved, and the Federal Reserve raised interest rates six times between June 1999 and May 2000 in an effort to cool the economy to achieve a soft landing. The burst of the stock market bubble occurred in the form of the NASDAQ crash in March 2000. Growth in gross domestic product slowed considerably in the third quarter of 2000 to the lowest rate since a contraction in the first quarter of 1992.[3]
The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee has determined that a peak in business activity occurred in the U.S. economy in March 2001. A peak marks the end of an expansion and the beginning of a recession. The determination of a peak date in March is thus a determination that the expansion that began in March 1992 ended in March 2001 and a recession began.Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia

So GWB and experts KNEW this would require incentives.
BUT NO ONE KNEW about 9/11 or the worst hurricane SEASONS!
If you truly want to the facts READ what happened during GWB presidency!

These events cost trillions and the point of the TAX cuts was knowing this recession was coming... a way to incentivize economic growth.
WHICH it did!
Did you look at the chart I submitted of Federal Revenue and expenditures?
Did you note that when the tax cuts came into play in 2004,etc REVENUE started to increase.
View attachment 219118

Sure they knew. They did it on purpose. And it all worked according to plan. They got rich. It’s called disaster capitalism

 

[healthmyths]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]6-GlExX6sqw[/MEDIA] Clinton's Big Budget Surplus Debunked - YouTube[/ame]

No myth.

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut

President Bush said Saturday that the most important number in the budget he sends to Congress next week is the $5.6 trillion surplus it projects over the next 10 years.

That huge projected surplus provides the underpinning of all the administration's tax-cut and spending plans, Mr. Bush said in his recorded weekly radio address.

You republicans only started calling it a myth after you squandered it in Iraq and on tax breaks to the rich.

You used the surplus as justification for tax breaks. That means either you were lying in 2001 or now. Which is it?

Where in the hell was there ever a projection of $5.6 Trillion surplus?

When you state there was a "surplus" that means there was $5.6 Trillion available to be spent!
That was truly a STUPID statement NEVER made by GWB because there NEVER EVER WAS A SURPLUS!

View attachment 219109

I did say it was a projected surplus. I didn't say we had $5.6 trillion sitting in a bank account did I?

But Bush used the PROJECTED Surplus to do all kinds of spending and to give tax breaks. So he fucked up. Bill Clinton had us on the right path.

So did Obama. Trumps tax break wasn't necessary either.

NO he DIDN"T!
Read the facts as to what happened!
GWB and experts KNEW there was a RECESSION coming in 2001!

FACT: Predictions that the bubble would burst emerged during the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s. Predictions about a future burst increased following the October 27, 1997 mini-crash, in the wake of the Asian crisis. This caused an uncertain economic climate during the first few months of 1998. However conditions improved, and the Federal Reserve raised interest rates six times between June 1999 and May 2000 in an effort to cool the economy to achieve a soft landing. The burst of the stock market bubble occurred in the form of the NASDAQ crash in March 2000. Growth in gross domestic product slowed considerably in the third quarter of 2000 to the lowest rate since a contraction in the first quarter of 1992.[3]
The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee has determined that a peak in business activity occurred in the U.S. economy in March 2001. A peak marks the end of an expansion and the beginning of a recession. The determination of a peak date in March is thus a determination that the expansion that began in March 1992 ended in March 2001 and a recession began.Early 2000s recession - Wikipedia

So GWB and experts KNEW this would require incentives.
BUT NO ONE KNEW about 9/11 or the worst hurricane SEASONS!
If you truly want to the facts READ what happened during GWB presidency!

These events cost trillions and the point of the TAX cuts was knowing this recession was coming... a way to incentivize economic growth.
WHICH it did!
Did you look at the chart I submitted of Federal Revenue and expenditures?
Did you note that when the tax cuts came into play in 2004,etc REVENUE started to increase.
View attachment 219118

Sure they knew. They did it on purpose. And it all worked according to plan. They got rich. It’s called disaster capitalism

Like these people?
A new development was the intervention of celebrity-backed NGOs. The philanthropic efforts of Wyclef Jean, Sean Penn, Bill Clinton and Bill Gates come in for particularly sharp criticism as unaccountable and aloof.
Disaster Capitalism: Making a Killing Out of Catastrophe by Antony Loewenstein review – the management of nightmares