Var wrote:
Posting raw statistics without the proper context means nothing, not that I expect you to understand what this means.
(in before "reality has a liberal bias")
I'll toss this out there too:
Quote:
It's also clear you don't know that slick willy actually changed the names of certain govn expenditures so they wouldn't show as govn debt.
Quote:
Receipts into any federal trust fund INCREASE the public debt, they do not reduce it. This is because the funds are immediately invested in Treasury securities so as to earn interest until obligated and expended, and any issuance of Treasury securities increases the public debt. When expended, Treasury securities are redeemed by the trust funds and the cash is used to fund the outlays authorized. This causes public debt to go down. Thus, an increase in debt associated with these trust funds is evidence of a SURPLUS of taxes and other receipts over expenditures made. You are trying to use one surplus to argue that another one didn't exist.
You and Steiner are hardly the only ones who are "confused" as to the actual relationship between debt and deficit. Many bogus right-wing articles try to pull the very same hoax. Just because the numbers they use are taken from valid sources does not mean that the numbers are being used correctly, and in these cases, they most definitely are not.
Bottom line is that the Clinton surpluses were quite real and there is nothing that can magically go back and erase them. Just as real were the ten-year budget projections of surplus upon surplus that Bushie walked in and destroyed in favor of his tax cuts for the rich programs that have served us so well since. Real and projected surpluses to god-awful real and projected deficits. This is the path that the right-wingers have walked us down. Nice going, guys.
You and Steiner are hardly the only ones who are "confused" as to the actual relationship between debt and deficit. Many bogus right-wing articles try to pull the very same hoax. Just because the numbers they use are taken from valid sources does not mean that the numbers are being used correctly, and in these cases, they most definitely are not.
Bottom line is that the Clinton surpluses were quite real and there is nothing that can magically go back and erase them. Just as real were the ten-year budget projections of surplus upon surplus that Bushie walked in and destroyed in favor of his tax cuts for the rich programs that have served us so well since. Real and projected surpluses to god-awful real and projected deficits. This is the path that the right-wingers have walked us down. Nice going, guys.
Edited, Sep 29th 2010 7:10pm by shintasama