Newt Gingrich proved Spending Cuts work

[LaDexter]

Your chart shows that the only year in the 90's spending went down was 1993.

Many spending programs like SS and Medicare/caid have COLA (cost of living adjustments) built in, so spending goes up automatically. Bill Clinton presided over six straight years of no spending increases when COLA is factored in. Two of those years were the failed attempt by Hillary to socialize health care. The next four were NEWT.

By the way, are you in favor of spending cuts now?

LOL!!

Didn't think so...

 

[LaDexter]

Can anyone find ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT who supported Newt's budgets in real time, not two decades later after they worked for the American people???

 

[IcebergSlim]

So then it is settled.

NEWT cut spending.

Cutting spending WORKED for the American people.

The Democrats HATE spending cuts.

The Democrats lie when they attempt to spin the "Clinton economy," which had NOTHING to do with what Bill and Hillary were trying to do = SPEND.

Can you provide any EVIDENCE to support the assertion that Newt cut spending?


Like, numbery things....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Newt is just more of the same old shit; america, always stuck in looking backward.

Hence the reason Hillary is leading

 

[IcebergSlim]

Can anyone find ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT who supported Newt's budgets in real time, not two decades later after they worked for the American people???

Do you have any idea how the budget process works?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Your chart shows that the only year in the 90's spending went down was 1993.

Many spending programs like SS and Medicare/caid have COLA (cost of living adjustments) built in, so spending goes up automatically. Bill Clinton presided over six straight years of no spending increases when COLA is factored in. Two of those years were the failed attempt by Hillary to socialize health care. The next four were NEWT.

By the way, are you in favor of spending cuts now?

LOL!!

Didn't think so...

So the patter of no increases in discretionary spending was established BEFORE Newt?

BTW, pretty much EVERY credible economic authority argues that we SHOULD increase federal spending...

 

[IcebergSlim]

Why did the Clintons shut the government down?

A: they wanted MORE SPENDING

Guess when NEWT was Speaker...

Uh...dude?

You're gonna want to show NOMINAL spending

 

[IcebergSlim]

Why did the Clintons shut the government down?

A: they wanted MORE SPENDING

Guess when NEWT was Speaker...

For FY 1997 Clinton requested 1.64 trillion......Congress passed 1.86....

For FY 1998 Clinton requested 1.69, Congress passed 1.65.

 

[LaDexter]

pretty much EVERY credible economic authority argues that we SHOULD increase federal spending...

The Democrats tried that noise in the 1990s, trotting out left wing economist after economist. They were all wrong, but that doesn't stop the Dems from trying again.


Here's some history for the liberal truth-challenged Hillary supporters here...

The Case for Newt Gingrich | The American Spectator


"when the Gingrich majority took power in 1995, it was greeted by the 1996 Clinton budget still projecting $200 billion annual budget deficits as far as the eye could see, totaling $2.7 trillion over 10 years, confirmed by CBO. The House passed a budget bill providing for $1 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years, and that was almost 20 years ago when $1 trillion was still real money.

In the government shutdown budget battles with Clinton, Gingrich won the substance, as Gingrich demonstrated the only way to balance the budget, with Reagan’s supply-side economics. That involved both cutting taxes, to get the economy booming, and cutting spending, resulting in the longest period of federal surpluses since the 1920s."



TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH

NEWT NEWT NEWT NEWT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Fenton Lum]

Newt is just more of the same old shit; america, always stuck in looking backward.

Hence the reason Hillary is leading

And the reason that the system attempted to vomit up another Clinton vs Bush.

 

[LaDexter]

Rasmussen has Trump +2 today...

Looks like Trump/Newt is starting to soar!!!!!!!!!

CUT CUT CUT THAT SPENDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[LaDexter]

For FY 1997 Clinton requested 1.64 trillion......Congress passed 1.86....?????

For FY 1998 Clinton requested 1.69, Congress passed 1.65.

Um, I think you have an 8 where a 5 or so is what happened... because the Dems were bitching every year for MORE SPENDING.

Government spending makes everyone not stealing taxdollars poorer. CUT THAT SPENDING, watch the Dems scream and whine and predict gloom and doom, and remember, they said those same things in the 1990s, and now try to take credit for exactly what they were whining about and opposing.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Can anyone find ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT who supported Newt's budgets in real time, not two decades later after they worked for the American people???

The FY 1998 budget w

pretty much EVERY credible economic authority argues that we SHOULD increase federal spending...

The Democrats tried that noise in the 1990s, trotting out left wing economist after economist. They were all wrong, but that doesn't stop the Dems from trying again.


Here's some history for the liberal truth-challenged Hillary supporters here...

The Case for Newt Gingrich | The American Spectator


"when the Gingrich majority took power in 1995, it was greeted by the 1996 Clinton budget still projecting $200 billion annual budget deficits as far as the eye could see, totaling $2.7 trillion over 10 years, confirmed by CBO. The House passed a budget bill providing for $1 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years, and that was almost 20 years ago when $1 trillion was still real money.

In the government shutdown budget battles with Clinton, Gingrich won the substance, as Gingrich demonstrated the only way to balance the budget, with Reagan’s supply-side economics. That involved both cutting taxes, to get the economy booming, and cutting spending, resulting in the longest period of federal surpluses since the 1920s."



TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH

NEWT NEWT NEWT NEWT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uh.....I discontinued my subscription to TAS before you were out of junior high...

Peter Ferrara is an innumerate hack. I have provided the numbers on federal tax receipts. The tax cut to which he refers was the reduction in cap gains rates....by the time it took effect, 90% of the deficit which was the Legacy of Supply Side Idiocy Part One had been eliminated.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

I don't think Newt would be a good VP pick, he would however be an excellent choice for Chief of Staff.

If I were Trump I'd be begging Kasich to take the job.

 

[IcebergSlim]

For FY 1997 Clinton requested 1.64 trillion......Congress passed 1.86....?????

For FY 1998 Clinton requested 1.69, Congress passed 1.65.

Um, I think you have an 8 where a 5 or so is what happened... because the Dems were bitching every year for MORE SPENDING.

Government spending makes everyone not stealing taxdollars poorer. CUT THAT SPENDING, watch the Dems scream and whine and predict gloom and doom, and remember, they said those same things in the 1990s, and now try to take credit for exactly what they were whining about and opposing.

I don't..... You can see for yourself.....would you like me to tell you where to look?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Can anyone find ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT who supported Newt's budgets in real time, not two decades later after they worked for the American people???

The FY 1998 budget passed the House with 129 Democrats Voting in favor....

It passed the Senate with 36 Democrats Voting in favor....nearly twice as many Republican senators voted nay than Democrats.

 

[LaDexter]

There were precisely ZERO Dem votes for the budget in 1995, 1996, and possibly 1997 too.

Heck, in 1995, the Clintons shut the government down over spending - the Dems wanted more - duh.

 

[LaDexter]

I don't..... You can see for yourself.....would you like me to tell you where to look?

So spending spiked up and then went down - LOL!!

That's not what the chart shows. The chart shows FLAT spending for the first six years of Clinton. Every year of Gingrich as Speaker, the Dems were bitching and whining for MORE SPENDING. All of their gloom and doom BS is now outed as BS, and all their "prestigious economists" were 100% wrong too.

 

[IcebergSlim]

There were precisely ZERO Dem votes for the budget in 1995, 1996, and possibly 1997 too.

Heck, in 1995, the Clintons shut the government down over spending - the Dems wanted more - duh.

This is for FY 1998, voted on June 5, 1997......tell everyone what you learned...
Budget resolution FY1998 (1997 - H.Con.Res. 84)

 

[IcebergSlim]

I don't..... You can see for yourself.....would you like me to tell you where to look?

So spending spiked up and then went down - LOL!!

That's not what the chart shows. The chart shows FLAT spending for the first six years of Clinton. Every year of Gingrich as Speaker, the Dems were bitching and whining for MORE SPENDING. All of their gloom and doom BS is now outed as BS, and all their "prestigious economists" were 100% wrong too.

To which chart are you referring?

The one showing spending in 2005 dollars?

Are you this obtuse in real life, La?