Misery index the highest in 28 years

[edthecynic]

Well maybe if the Dems had made the spending cuts under Reagan like they agreed to, the deficits in those years wouldn't have been as bad. Putting it all on Reagan is BS, he can't write the legislation.

The truth is that both political parties are responsible for the debt crisis, trying to blame one side over the other is BS. If anybody wants to play games with the numbers and point fingers, have at it.

Apparently they made all the cuts Reagan wanted because he signed the bills without a veto!

Tip O'Neil promised $2 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts. I wonder which party Tip belonged to........?

Except it was Reagan who welshed on the spending cuts so he could continue his military spending.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Apparently they made all the cuts Reagan wanted because he signed the bills without a veto!

Tip O'Neil promised $2 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts. I wonder which party Tip belonged to........?

Except it was Reagan who welshed on the spending cuts so he could continue his military spending.

Allow me to elaborate, Tip O'Neil promised $2 of non-defense spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts.
Try again? LOL!

 

[edthecynic]

Tip O'Neil promised $2 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts. I wonder which party Tip belonged to........?

Except it was Reagan who welshed on the spending cuts so he could continue his military spending.

Allow me to elaborate, Tip O'Neil promised $2 of non-defense spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts.
Try again? LOL!

Bullshit!

Reagan only gave lip service against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985, he outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement reductions. Reagan blocked any deal that cut military spending.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Except it was Reagan who welshed on the spending cuts so he could continue his military spending.

Allow me to elaborate, Tip O'Neil promised $2 of non-defense spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts.
Try again? LOL!

Bullshit!

Reagan only gave lip service against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985, he outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement reductions. Reagan blocked any deal that cut military spending.

Bullshit? Is that easier than providing proof? LOL!
1985? I'm talking about 1983.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Clinton's deficits were less than the interest on the debt Reagan and Bush I passed on to him. You can't honestly blame the interest on the GOP debt on Clinton, now can you? Oh that's Right, you're a CON$ervative so yes it's Clinton's fault the GOP borrow and spend.

Since you haven't shown what the rates were, while Clinton was President, you can't make that claim.
Why can't I blame the interest on Clinton?
He could have paid off the debt and he didn't.
Didn't the nasty GOP Congress spend less money than Clinton wanted?
You can't give Clinton credit for GOP stinginess, can you?
Oh, that's right, you're a Lieberal, that's what you do, lie.

What difference does it make what the rates were, the interest payments were around $300 billion per year according to the CON$ervative Heritage Foundation and Clinton's budget deficits averaged about $175 billion, so Clinton covered all of his spending and almost half of the interest on the GOP spending.

What difference does it make? LOL!
What grade were you in when you failed out of math class?
I show net interest payments were $1.8 trillion under Clinton.
In Jan 1993, the average rate on gov debt was 7.217%.
In Jan 1994, the average rate on gov debt was 6.691%.
In Jan 1995, the average rate on gov debt was 7.067%.
In Jan 1996, the average rate on gov debt was 6.995%.
In Jan 1997, the average rate on gov debt was 6.881%.
In Jan 1998, the average rate on gov debt was 6.839%.
In Jan 1999, the average rate on gov debt was 6.550%.
In Jan 2000, the average rate on gov debt was 6.537%.

Maybe you should recalculate how much of the interest on "GOP spending" Clinton actually covered?

 

[edthecynic]

Allow me to elaborate, Tip O'Neil promised $2 of non-defense spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts.
Try again? LOL!

Bullshit!

Reagan only gave lip service against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985, he outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement reductions. Reagan blocked any deal that cut military spending.

Bullshit? Is that easier than providing proof? LOL!
1985? I'm talking about 1983.

You provide no proof, only your revisionist bullshit, so why should I have to do anything but remind you that I remember what happened having lived through it.

It was O'Neill who tried to get Reagan to cut his out of control spending for crap like Star Wars. Remember???

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bullshit!

Reagan only gave lip service against deficits while doing everything he could to protect his tax and defense programs that were their primary cause. In 1985, he outmaneuvered GOP Senate leader Bob Dole’s efforts to cut a deficit-reduction deal with O’Neill that included tax increases and defense cuts in return for entitlement reductions. Reagan blocked any deal that cut military spending.

Bullshit? Is that easier than providing proof? LOL!
1985? I'm talking about 1983.

You provide no proof, only your revisionist bullshit, so why should I have to do anything but remind you that I remember what happened having lived through it.

It was O'Neill who tried to get Reagan to cut his out of control spending for crap like Star Wars. Remember???

You lived through it? LOL!
Then you should have remembered that O'Neill promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. Lying liberal sack of shit, but then I repeat myself.....

"The scheduled increases in accelerated depreciation deductions were repealed, a 10 percent withholding on dividends and interest paid to individuals was instituted, and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act wage base and tax rate were increased. Excise taxes on cigarettes were temporarily doubled, and excise taxes on telephone service temporarily tripled, in TEFRA.[3]

President of the United States Ronald Reagan agreed to the tax hikes on the promise from Congress of a $3 reduction in spending for every $1 increase in taxes. Some conservatives, led by then-Congressman Jack Kemp, claim that the promised spending reductions never occurred.[4] One week after TEFRA was signed, H.R. 6863 - the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 which Ronald Reagan claimed would "bust the budget" [5] was passed by both houses of Congress over his veto.

 

[edthecynic]

Since you haven't shown what the rates were, while Clinton was President, you can't make that claim.
Why can't I blame the interest on Clinton?
He could have paid off the debt and he didn't.
Didn't the nasty GOP Congress spend less money than Clinton wanted?
You can't give Clinton credit for GOP stinginess, can you?
Oh, that's right, you're a Lieberal, that's what you do, lie.

What difference does it make what the rates were, the interest payments were around $300 billion per year according to the CON$ervative Heritage Foundation and Clinton's budget deficits averaged about $175 billion, so Clinton covered all of his spending and almost half of the interest on the GOP spending.

What difference does it make? LOL!
What grade were you in when you failed out of math class?
I show net interest payments were $1.8 trillion under Clinton.
In Jan 1993, the average rate on gov debt was 7.217%.
In Jan 1994, the average rate on gov debt was 6.691%.
In Jan 1995, the average rate on gov debt was 7.067%.
In Jan 1996, the average rate on gov debt was 6.995%.
In Jan 1997, the average rate on gov debt was 6.881%.
In Jan 1998, the average rate on gov debt was 6.839%.
In Jan 1999, the average rate on gov debt was 6.550%.
In Jan 2000, the average rate on gov debt was 6.537%.

Maybe you should recalculate how much of the interest on "GOP spending" Clinton actually covered?

So even using your numbers instead of Heritage's, Clinton's deficits totaled about $1.4 trillion so he still added no new spending to the deficit, only the interest from the GOP debt. No matter how you slice it, Clinton added nothing to the national debt that future presidents had to pay interest on.

 

[edthecynic]

Well maybe if the Dems had made the spending cuts under Reagan like they agreed to, the deficits in those years wouldn't have been as bad. Putting it all on Reagan is BS, he can't write the legislation.

The truth is that both political parties are responsible for the debt crisis, trying to blame one side over the other is BS. If anybody wants to play games with the numbers and point fingers, have at it.

Apparently they made all the cuts Reagan wanted because he signed the bills without a veto!

Tip O'Neil promised $2 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases and then never followed through with the cuts. I wonder which party Tip belonged to........?

Bullshit? Is that easier than providing proof? LOL!
1985? I'm talking about 1983.

You provide no proof, only your revisionist bullshit, so why should I have to do anything but remind you that I remember what happened having lived through it.

It was O'Neill who tried to get Reagan to cut his out of control spending for crap like Star Wars. Remember???

You lived through it? LOL!
Then you should have remembered that O'Neill promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. Lying liberal sack of shit, but then I repeat myself.....

"The scheduled increases in accelerated depreciation deductions were repealed, a 10 percent withholding on dividends and interest paid to individuals was instituted, and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act wage base and tax rate were increased. Excise taxes on cigarettes were temporarily doubled, and excise taxes on telephone service temporarily tripled, in TEFRA.[3]

President of the United States Ronald Reagan agreed to the tax hikes on the promise from Congress of a $3 reduction in spending for every $1 increase in taxes. Some conservatives, led by then-Congressman Jack Kemp, claim that the promised spending reductions never occurred.[4] One week after TEFRA was signed, H.R. 6863 - the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 which Ronald Reagan claimed would "bust the budget" [5] was passed by both houses of Congress over his veto.

Gee what a surprise. NOT. You left this part out of your un-cited wikipedia quote:

Four years later, then-budget director David Stockman, however, stated that Congress substantially upheld its end of the bargain, and cites the Administration's failure to identify management savings and its resistance to defense spending cuts as the key impediments to greater outlay savings.[4] The original TEFRA bill as passed by the House lowered taxes.[7] The Republican-controlled Senate replaced the text of the original House bill with a number of tax increases, and the bill became law after President Ronald Reagan signed it. A lawsuit was filed by Garrison R. Armstrong claiming that TEFRA violated Article One of the United States Constitution which requires all revenue bills to originate in the House. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against Armstrong, saying

We therefore conclude that the Senate did not exceed its authority under the origination clause when it proposed the extensive amendments that ultimately became TEFRA.
​

 

[JRK]

What difference does it make what the rates were, the interest payments were around $300 billion per year according to the CON$ervative Heritage Foundation and Clinton's budget deficits averaged about $175 billion, so Clinton covered all of his spending and almost half of the interest on the GOP spending.

What difference does it make? LOL!
What grade were you in when you failed out of math class?
I show net interest payments were $1.8 trillion under Clinton.
In Jan 1993, the average rate on gov debt was 7.217%.
In Jan 1994, the average rate on gov debt was 6.691%.
In Jan 1995, the average rate on gov debt was 7.067%.
In Jan 1996, the average rate on gov debt was 6.995%.
In Jan 1997, the average rate on gov debt was 6.881%.
In Jan 1998, the average rate on gov debt was 6.839%.
In Jan 1999, the average rate on gov debt was 6.550%.
In Jan 2000, the average rate on gov debt was 6.537%.

Maybe you should recalculate how much of the interest on "GOP spending" Clinton actually covered?

So even using your numbers instead of Heritage's, Clinton's deficits totaled about $1.4 trillion so he still added no new spending to the deficit, only the interest from the GOP debt. No matter how you slice it, Clinton added nothing to the national debt that future presidents had to pay interest on.

Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:

Fiscal
Year Year
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion

also done with a GOP congress
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

 

[edthecynic]

What difference does it make? LOL!
What grade were you in when you failed out of math class?
I show net interest payments were $1.8 trillion under Clinton.
In Jan 1993, the average rate on gov debt was 7.217%.
In Jan 1994, the average rate on gov debt was 6.691%.
In Jan 1995, the average rate on gov debt was 7.067%.
In Jan 1996, the average rate on gov debt was 6.995%.
In Jan 1997, the average rate on gov debt was 6.881%.
In Jan 1998, the average rate on gov debt was 6.839%.
In Jan 1999, the average rate on gov debt was 6.550%.
In Jan 2000, the average rate on gov debt was 6.537%.

Maybe you should recalculate how much of the interest on "GOP spending" Clinton actually covered?

So even using your numbers instead of Heritage's, Clinton's deficits totaled about $1.4 trillion so he still added no new spending to the deficit, only the interest from the GOP debt. No matter how you slice it, Clinton added nothing to the national debt that future presidents had to pay interest on.

Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:

Fiscal
Year Year
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion

also done with a GOP congress
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Your own numbers shoe 1,8 trillion in interest on the GOP Reagan BushI debt Clinton inherited, and 1.4 trillion total deficits for Clinton's 8 years not counting the SS surplus as an asset as you CON$ do for Bush. Now earlier in this thread you said Bush could not be blamed for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, but here you are blaming Clinton for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited.

So it comes down to, if you are going to claim that Bush's deficit was 160 billion in 2007 by not counting the money borrowed from SS as borrowed money, then by that same standard Clinton ran a surplus. And if you say Bush cannot be charged for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, then Clinton can't be charged either and by that standard Clinton also ran a surplus. However if you are going to say that Clinton never had a surplus, then Bush never had a deficit of 160 billion in 2007. You can't have it both ways no matter how much you throw a tantrum and stamp your feet.

 

[JRK]

So even using your numbers instead of Heritage's, Clinton's deficits totaled about $1.4 trillion so he still added no new spending to the deficit, only the interest from the GOP debt. No matter how you slice it, Clinton added nothing to the national debt that future presidents had to pay interest on.

Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:

Fiscal
Year Year
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion

also done with a GOP congress
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Your own numbers shoe 1,8 trillion in interest on the GOP Reagan BushI debt Clinton inherited, and 1.4 trillion total deficits for Clinton's 8 years not counting the SS surplus as an asset as you CON$ do for Bush. Now earlier in this thread you said Bush could not be blamed for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, but here you are blaming Clinton for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited.

So it comes down to, if you are going to claim that Bush's deficit was 160 billion in 2007 by not counting the money borrowed from SS as borrowed money, then by that same standard Clinton ran a surplus. And if you say Bush cannot be charged for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, then Clinton can't be charged either and by that standard Clinton also ran a surplus. However if you are going to say that Clinton never had a surplus, then Bush never had a deficit of 160 billion in 2007. You can't have it both ways no matter how much you throw a tantrum and stamp your feet.

I have no issue what what your saying
your missing the point(s)
Read the thread I supplied for you, it has some to do with interest, but not all of it
The surplus of SS has most to do with it
Let ma add
every time you make this claim, your just giving praise to the GOP congress who made it happen

your also comparing a time in which there was no 9-11
so-on and so on

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Obama Depression...Will you survive it?

 

[edthecynic]

Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:

Fiscal
Year Year
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion

also done with a GOP congress
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Your own numbers shoe 1,8 trillion in interest on the GOP Reagan BushI debt Clinton inherited, and 1.4 trillion total deficits for Clinton's 8 years not counting the SS surplus as an asset as you CON$ do for Bush. Now earlier in this thread you said Bush could not be blamed for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, but here you are blaming Clinton for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited.

So it comes down to, if you are going to claim that Bush's deficit was 160 billion in 2007 by not counting the money borrowed from SS as borrowed money, then by that same standard Clinton ran a surplus. And if you say Bush cannot be charged for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, then Clinton can't be charged either and by that standard Clinton also ran a surplus. However if you are going to say that Clinton never had a surplus, then Bush never had a deficit of 160 billion in 2007. You can't have it both ways no matter how much you throw a tantrum and stamp your feet.

I have no issue what what your saying
your missing the point(s)
Read the thread I supplied for you, it has some to do with interest, but not all of it
The surplus of SS has most to do with it
Let ma add
every time you make this claim, your just giving praise to the GOP congress who made it happen

your also comparing a time in which there was no 9-11
so-on and so on

Funny thing about that spin, once Clinton was replaced by Bush, that same GOP congress never balanced a single budget ever again!!!!!!!! Hummmmmmmmmm

 

[Full-Auto]

Your own numbers shoe 1,8 trillion in interest on the GOP Reagan BushI debt Clinton inherited, and 1.4 trillion total deficits for Clinton's 8 years not counting the SS surplus as an asset as you CON$ do for Bush. Now earlier in this thread you said Bush could not be blamed for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, but here you are blaming Clinton for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited.

So it comes down to, if you are going to claim that Bush's deficit was 160 billion in 2007 by not counting the money borrowed from SS as borrowed money, then by that same standard Clinton ran a surplus. And if you say Bush cannot be charged for the interest on the GOP debt he inherited, then Clinton can't be charged either and by that standard Clinton also ran a surplus. However if you are going to say that Clinton never had a surplus, then Bush never had a deficit of 160 billion in 2007. You can't have it both ways no matter how much you throw a tantrum and stamp your feet.

I have no issue what what your saying
your missing the point(s)
Read the thread I supplied for you, it has some to do with interest, but not all of it
The surplus of SS has most to do with it
Let ma add
every time you make this claim, your just giving praise to the GOP congress who made it happen

your also comparing a time in which there was no 9-11
so-on and so on

Funny thing about that spin, once Clinton was replaced by Bush, that same GOP congress never balanced a single budget ever again!!!!!!!! Hummmmmmmmmm

Cute, but it wssnt the same.

 

[edthecynic]

I have no issue what what your saying
your missing the point(s)
Read the thread I supplied for you, it has some to do with interest, but not all of it
The surplus of SS has most to do with it
Let ma add
every time you make this claim, your just giving praise to the GOP congress who made it happen

your also comparing a time in which there was no 9-11
so-on and so on

Funny thing about that spin, once Clinton was replaced by Bush, that same GOP congress never balanced a single budget ever again!!!!!!!! Hummmmmmmmmm

Cute, but it wssnt the same.

Bush had a GOP House and Senate for his first 6 years and never balanced the budget once. The difference was clearly Clinton in the White House and not the GOP in Congress!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Funny thing about that spin, once Clinton was replaced by Bush, that same GOP congress never balanced a single budget ever again!!!!!!!! Hummmmmmmmmm

Cute, but it wssnt the same.

Bush had a GOP House and Senate for his first 6 years and never balanced the budget once. The difference was clearly Clinton in the White House and not the GOP in Congress!!!!

Oh yes, clearly.

 

[JRK]

Cute, but it wssnt the same.

Bush had a GOP House and Senate for his first 6 years and never balanced the budget once. The difference was clearly Clinton in the White House and not the GOP in Congress!!!!

Oh yes, clearly.

The senate from 01-02 was a dem senate
lying will do you no good

there was this tiny event called 9-11
there was a recession, spring 2001

There was 2 million fewer jobs in 03 than there was in 01
thats a revenue issue

the last GOP budget was within 163 billion of being balanced, 2007

 

[edthecynic]

Bush had a GOP House and Senate for his first 6 years and never balanced the budget once. The difference was clearly Clinton in the White House and not the GOP in Congress!!!!

Oh yes, clearly.

The senate from 01-02 was a dem senate
lying will do you no good

there was this tiny event called 9-11
there was a recession, spring 2001

There was 2 million fewer jobs in 03 than there was in 01
thats a revenue issue

the last GOP budget was within 163 billion of being balanced, 2007

Well part of 01-02 after Jeffords became an independent and caucused with the Dems. But he voted many times with the GOP like when he voted for Bush's 2001 tax cuts.

9/11 was on Bush's watch and so was the 2001 Bush Recession. $500 billion was borrowed in 2007 to pay the bills.