I agree that Clinton never had a surplus. . .if you consider the TOTAL, ACCUMULATED National debt. HE DID have a budget surplus in his last 4 years, as demonstrated by the graph I provided.
if he never had a surplus how could he have a surplus ?
I agree that Clinton never had a surplus. . .if you consider the TOTAL, ACCUMULATED National debt. HE DID have a budget surplus in his last 4 years, as demonstrated by the graph I provided.
if he never had a surplus how could he have a surplus ?
I know you're not that thick!
The WHOLE National debt was not erased under Clinton. . .but the last four years of his presidency, instead of going further in the hole (as his predecessors, and even him, to a very mild extend during his first four years), he had a SURPLUS for THAT TIME PERIOD.
Obviously he couldn't erase in 8 years the 5 trillions national debt that was already outstanding! No one ever claimed that.
Look at the chart, and read the analysis by FactCheck.Org. I know it's probably painful to you, but if you have an ounce of fairness, you owe it to yourself and to all of us to get your facts straight.
By the way, Wikepedia gives us the increase in National Debt from 1978 through 2005 under Republicans and under Democrats:
1978-2005 Democratic 4.2% (increase in National debt)
1978-2005 Republican 12.1% (increase in National debt)
I saw that every single (fiscal) year of his presidency that the public debt went up. Here is what the Dept of Treasury reports (Clinton was in 1993-2001): (sorry for the two parter, not my idea)
21st century
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
20th century (2nd half)
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16
The increase from 1999 to 2000 is relatively small but an increase none the less.
Until you read and understand the FActcheck.org analysis, I will not answer your statements.
At least, you are coming closer to recognizing what good Clinton did, especially compared to the preceeding and following Republican Presidents!
So. . .tata!
the last four years of his presidency, instead of going further in the hole (as his predecessors, and even him, to a very mild extend during his first four years), he had a SURPLUS for THAT TIME PERIOD.
Statements like that beg the question: Do you understand the terms being discussed here? Debt, Deficit, Surplus... Dictionary.com can assist you if you're confused.The WHOLE National debt was not erased under Clinton. . .
Until you read and understand the FActcheck.org analysis, I will not answer your statements.
At least, you are coming closer to recognizing what good Clinton did, especially compared to the preceeding and following Republican Presidents!
So. . .tata!
It came up because FatherTime declared that Bush was left with a massive surplus and managed to throw it all away and drive the country into ruin.
He stated, "Bush took over with a government surplus and the previous administration creating a huge amount of jobs. He left bailing out the banks and with the country on the brink of depression, the worst financial situation since the 30s. Your logic doesn't include that. Your version of "logic" is rightwing Limbaugh loon dogma." - FatherTime
He then followed it up with: "It is a known fact that Clinton left with a surplus, this is unquestioned. Even articles saying that there is some debate about how large the surplus was admit that he left the country in great economic shape. You can state some conspiratorial theory but then again you probably think Obama was born in the Congo too. -FatherTime
After this post, I responded with a breakdown of the actual debt figures straight from the United States government....which in fact showed the exact opposite of FatherTime's statements.
He responded, "I love how the Repubs want to rewrite history. This is how they find Obama responsible for the financial state of the nation right now." -FatherTime
And, "It's a fact spoken on every mainstream news outlet that Clinton left with a surplus. I don't care about the moderator's fringe stats." -FatherTime
You then stated "The surplus wasn't enough to erase the national debt. . .however, the national debt DECREASED in the 8 years of Clinton's presidency and GREATLY INCREASED under the 8 years of Bush presidency" - Openmind
Also, "How many sources do you need that shows that Clinton's presidency was highly effective in terms of economy, including GREATLY lower national debt?" -Openmind
And, "No, dear. . .YOU are missing the point! The fact is that the national debt was decreased in the 8 years when Clinton was in office. . .by the amount of the surplus. . .which LOWERED the deficit!" - Openmind
And, "NO. I claimed a BUDGET SURPLUS that allowed for a DECREASE IN NATIONAL DEBT of 9.7%" -Openmind
You, Openmind, were a main voice in continuing to talk about a "surplus", which is why it must continue to be discussed. The simple fact (as easily seen from our government's own figures) shows that we never a surplus, and added to the debt every single year.
And according to FatherTime, for simply pointing this out (using Treasury figures) I am a person who "think Obama was born in the Congo" and full of conspiracy theories. It is a shame he has left and will not be back to attempt to back up his absurd position on the matter.