It also had to do with the fact that Clinton fought hard to prevent the budget from being balanced - his first act upon taking office was an attempt to increase the deficit, and his proposed budgets had $200 billion deficits as far as the eye could see.
To say “Clinton achieved a balanced budget” is pretty close to an outright lie. Unfortunately, it is a lie that much of the SDMB wants to believe, and they aren’t about to let facts get in the way of a comforting myth.
Regards,
Shodan
So long as the problems that Greece have doesn’t affect anything in the UK, I don’t mind what happens! 
And now WE RIOT!!!
That was yesterday, before the vote. Don’t see anything happening after.
Highly misleading. Immediately before taking office Clinton planned, a) a small temporary increase in the budget deficit to fight the first Bush recession, b) a middle class tax cut, c) an increase in tax rates on higher incomes and d) greater deficit reduction through 1996 than he campaigned on. Cite.
Republicans claimed his program would crush the economy. Instead we had some of the strongest growth in potential GDP in decades. Bruce Bartlett, architect of the Kemp Roth tax cuts, noted that “Although much of the budgetary savings came from lower defense spending and reduced interest on the debt, entitlement spending also fell to 10.6 percent of G.D.P. in 2000 from 11.5 percent in 1992.”
The Republicans opposed the 1993 budget, which provided the tax increases and military spending cuts that lay the foundation for the 1990s growth explosion. To their shame: you can see the results in Shodan’s distorted take above. Gingrich Feb 2, 1993: " I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen." He was wrong.
Of course the real test occurred when the Republicans controlled both the legislature and the Presidency. The result was pointless and expensive war, budget busting tax cuts for fat cats and de-regulation resulting in housing bubbles and subsequent economic collapse.
Wow. Clinton blocked Newt Gingrich’s tax cuts, paving the way for a small budget surplus. Those are simply the facts.
Nope, 100% accurate and true.
Clinton’s first act upon becoming President was an attempt to increase the deficit, exactly as I said.
Exactly as I said.
Exactly as I said.
As I said, it’s a comforting lie that Clinton balanced the budget, but a lie nonetheless.
Regards,
Shodan
Again Shodan: temporary deficit. It was a stimulus program proposed after Clinton took office. Why can’t you just say that, rather than misleading your readers?
To address the long run deficit he pushed for and passed a tax increase, which Republicans predicted would destroy the economy. They were wrong. And they never learned from their error.
During the decade, federal spending as a share of GDP declined, largely due to energetic efforts to slow military spending following the end of the cold war.
And um, about those 5 budgets: that’s a quote from Stephen Moore of Cato, right? But budget surpluses started in 1998 and grew until 2000. Here’s another record of them: US Budget Deficit History (2001 had the last budget surplus, which was lower than the year previous). So why are you jabbering about 1995? And in the face of government shutdowns, what’s the significance of submitting multiple budgets during negotiations? The question is what was Clinton’s proposed budget deficit in his initial budget and what was Congress’ counter-proposal. Typically they are roughly equal.
Because Clinton did not propose a temporary deficit. His budgets attempted to continue the deficit to the tune of $200 billion a year.
Regards,
Shodan
As I recall, Clinton’s budgets stopped the budget deficits form increasing. This was (misleadingly) billed as a “balanced budget.”
To be fair, Shodan has about as much likelihood of actually misleading anyone here as the nice man in the e-mail who needs some help getting his money out of Nigeria.
Oh, honestly. If you actually do not understand what money is, then you have no business being in this thread lecturing people. You could just do a search on these boards for Hellestal’s user name (he/she is the big MMT proponent on these boards) and you’d learn more than you ever wanted to know about what money is, how it’s created and how it’s destroyed. But you’d rather revel in your ignorance than learn something.
You wouldn’t be allowed to vote.
Eh. If they were seriously concerned about losing money (which they’re not), they can just dump the loans on the ECB.
Well, since I actually know how the ECB (and every other central bank) creates money, yeah, I do think it’s coming out of thin air.
I have no idea what you’re trying to say here, but what we know is that the investment class (or at least the major banks) have been busted for manipulating interest rates. So, roulette dice at a fixed casino is probably the better analogy.
Well, one Greek MP just slipped and revealed their strategy:
The latest round of required laws include an overhaul of the hugely fucked-up Greek Civil Law system (litigation runs years and years).
The MP pointed out that the law was “Unconstitutional”, meaning that it would be thrown out by the Greek legal system.
The lawyers were given the opportunity to vote on substantially the same reforms a few months ago. The vote was 93% against. Guess how long this law will survive.
And they wonder why nobody trusts them…
See: