This explains our current parties pretty well

[Truthmatters]

Supply side economics was a poltical hack invention and is not based in reality

 

[plt42]

Do you always MAKE SHIT UP when you dont get your way?

My goodness... you're a contrary little person, aren't you. Sorry 'bout that. I hope you have a good day.

 

[sangha]

Yes the debt ceiling was raised. A shameful practice. I did notice the dems did not oppose.

In fact they ramped up spending to make bush look rather amateurist.
But you are only concerned on what the repubs spent all the while looking the other way while you raid SS. Its been going on since 65 so you think its ok. 65 is the same year democrats declared war on families and created the marraige penalty.

Are you new at this?

After blaming the dems for something the repukes did, the wingnut has been so pwned, he is going to blame the dems for not objecting, even though they did

And it was the repukes who controlled congress while it spent money like a drunken sailor on leave. It was the repukes who turned a budget surplus into a deficit, but you're too weak to admit it

Wingnut like you makes debating real easy. There was no budget surplus.

As of Fiscal year 1999 the national debt was at:

5,674,178,209,886.86

WIngnuts don't understand the difference between "national debt" and "budget deficit"

 

[sangha]

There was a budget surplus

Anyone can create a budget surplus, all that is required is you take expenses off the books like the government.

I cant afford your type of surplus. The debt increased with that surplus, that was before the cuts were enacted.

Wrong

Republicans can't create a budget surplus. A democrat can, and has

 

[sangha]

There was a budget surplus

Explain how you can have a budget surplus when your debt keeps going up?

Simple. The govt spends less in one year than it takes in.

Boy, are you dumb

 

[Truthmatters]

Do you always MAKE SHIT UP when you dont get your way?

My goodness... you're a contrary little person, aren't you. Sorry 'bout that. I hope you have a good day.

I require people to be honest, I dont think you can meet the standard.

 

[sangha]

Wingnut like you makes debating real easy. There was no budget surplus.

As of Fiscal year 1999 the national debt was at:

5,674,178,209,886.86

Because bush* and the republicans are Big Spending Statists

wingnut how did Bush have anything to do with spending? in 1999? This portion of the argument is dealing with Clinton surplus myth. He did not have one.

No, the argument is your absurd claim that there can't be a budget surplus if there's a national debt. But I dobn't blame you for trying to change the subject

 

[Truthmatters]

There was a budget surplus

Explain how you can have a budget surplus when your debt keeps going up?

Simple. The govt spends less in one year than it takes in.

Boy, are you dumb

Or dishonest.

They always disapear when you point out either.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

After blaming the dems for something the repukes did, the wingnut has been so pwned, he is going to blame the dems for not objecting, even though they did

And it was the repukes who controlled congress while it spent money like a drunken sailor on leave. It was the repukes who turned a budget surplus into a deficit, but you're too weak to admit it

Wingnut like you makes debating real easy. There was no budget surplus.

As of Fiscal year 1999 the national debt was at:

5,674,178,209,886.86

WIngnuts don't understand the difference between "national debt" and "budget deficit"

I like it when wingnuts think they know what they are talking about.
Time to go to be junior daddy's hoime

Total National Debt is calculated by adding the public debt to the intragovernmental debt. As a result, the national debt can increase even when the public debt decreases if the intragovernmental debt increases by a larger amount.
If the combined surplus from general taxes plus the total surplus of trust funds actually results in a surplus, that means the government received more money than it needs that year. In that case it will pay down the public debt--even if intragovernmental debt has increased. That's what happened in 2000. The combined total of taxes and trust fund surpluses exceeded the amount of money the government needed that year, and some of the extra amount was used to pay down the public debt.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Explain how you can have a budget surplus when your debt keeps going up?

Simple. The govt spends less in one year than it takes in.

Boy, are you dumb

Or dishonest.

They always disapear when you point out either.

You are the most dishonest hack here. begone troll

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Because bush* and the republicans are Big Spending Statists

wingnut how did Bush have anything to do with spending? in 1999? This portion of the argument is dealing with Clinton surplus myth. He did not have one.

No, the argument is your absurd claim that there can't be a budget surplus if there's a national debt. But I dobn't blame you for trying to change the subject

Can't read and remember what you wrote? You said Bush was a big spender.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Do you always MAKE SHIT UP when you dont get your way?

My goodness... you're a contrary little person, aren't you. Sorry 'bout that. I hope you have a good day.

I require people to be honest, I dont think you can meet the standard.

How about you practice what you preach?

 

[Truthmatters]

Simple. The govt spends less in one year than it takes in.

Boy, are you dumb

Or dishonest.

They always disapear when you point out either.

You are the most dishonest hack here. begone troll

I dont lie and if you claim I do go get one fucking example of a lie by me on this or any site.

 

[Yurt]

Simple. The govt spends less in one year than it takes in.

Boy, are you dumb

Or dishonest.

They always disapear when you point out either.

You are the most dishonest hack here. begone troll

lol

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

Supply side economics was a poltical hack invention and is not based in reality

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Or dishonest.

They always disapear when you point out either.

You are the most dishonest hack here. begone troll

I dont lie and if you claim I do go get one fucking example of a lie by me on this or any site.

If I have to point out old replies of your's that others have pointed out that you lied and you still don't get it then it's to late for you.

 

[sangha]

wingnut how did Bush have anything to do with spending? in 1999? This portion of the argument is dealing with Clinton surplus myth. He did not have one.

No, the argument is your absurd claim that there can't be a budget surplus if there's a national debt. But I dobn't blame you for trying to change the subject

Can't read and remember what you wrote? You said Bush was a big spender.

Bush was a big spender. Under bush, the US spent more money than it had under any previous president. bush set records for govt spending

In wingnut world, republicans cut spending. In the real world, that has never happened

 

[amrchaos]

I always thought "They suck" was a good description of the Republican/Democrat party.

After reading the ops post, I am still waiting for a correction!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, the argument is your absurd claim that there can't be a budget surplus if there's a national debt. But I dobn't blame you for trying to change the subject

Can't read and remember what you wrote? You said Bush was a big spender.

Bush was a big spender. Under bush, the US spent more money than it had under any previous president. bush set records for govt spending

In wingnut world, republicans cut spending. In the real world, that has never happened

Fiscal End Claimed Public Intra-gov Total National
Year Date Surplus Debt Holdings Debt
FY1997 9/30/1997 $3.789667T $1.623478T $5.413146T
FY1998 9/30/1998 $69.2B $3.733864T $55.8B $1.792328T $168.9B $5.526193T $113B
FY1999 9/30/1999 $122.7B $3.636104T $97.8B $2.020166T $227.8B $5.656270T $130.1B
FY2000 9/29/2000 $230.0B $3.405303T $230.8B $2.268874T $248.7B $5.674178T $17.9B
FY2001 9/28/2001 $3.339310T $66.0B $2.468153T $199.3B $5.807463T $133.3B


Fiscal Year National Debt Deficit
Year Ending
FY1993 9/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 9/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 9/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 9/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 9/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 9/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 9/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 9/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 9/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion


The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

 

[sangha]

Can't read and remember what you wrote? You said Bush was a big spender.

Bush was a big spender. Under bush, the US spent more money than it had under any previous president. bush set records for govt spending

In wingnut world, republicans cut spending. In the real world, that has never happened

Fiscal End Claimed Public Intra-gov Total National
Year Date Surplus Debt Holdings Debt
FY1997 9/30/1997 $3.789667T $1.623478T $5.413146T
FY1998 9/30/1998 $69.2B $3.733864T $55.8B $1.792328T $168.9B $5.526193T $113B
FY1999 9/30/1999 $122.7B $3.636104T $97.8B $2.020166T $227.8B $5.656270T $130.1B
FY2000 9/29/2000 $230.0B $3.405303T $230.8B $2.268874T $248.7B $5.674178T $17.9B
FY2001 9/28/2001 $3.339310T $66.0B $2.468153T $199.3B $5.807463T $133.3B


Fiscal Year National Debt Deficit
Year Ending
FY1993 9/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 9/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 9/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 9/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 9/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 9/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 9/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 9/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 9/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion


The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Wingnuts don't understand the difference between the "national debt" and a "budget surplus"