White House to Project Record Deficit

4th. Worst. President. Ever.

 

Was this timed purposefully to coincide with the DNC, or are they just all too happy to add fuel to the fire...

 

They are masters of spin...wouldn't surprise me if they announce official figures by Friday afternoon, as they tend to do....

 

Keep in mind that this does not include the extra 50 billion they will ask for as supplemental reconstruction money for Iraq after the election.

 

One could buy a lot of super-strength weed for $420 billion.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0725-03.htm

 

Yeh! and we now control those Afghani poppy fields....Oops!

Sorry, I was just going to point out 4 years ago we had a surplus. So it's actually more than $420B.
We can always announce another tax break for the top 10%.

But we'll just keep borrowing money from Japan and China, that'll keep them right in our pockets.

 

What's the difference, really, between this admins policies toward most Americans, generationally, and the policies of a hypothetical admin we might conceive of that actually hates most Americans, and only mollifies that sensibility publicly to get into office.

When your policy becomes relatively indistinguishable from a general policy of hate toward most Americans, that's a problem, to sort of understate it a bit...

 

You're right, to a debt that can never be repaid it's nothing.

 

But it's not as big as they originally predicted.

 

Have the Democrats offered anything but lip service to the importance of holding down the national debt? No.

Although the deficit is an issue in that it reflects policy priorities of the present Admin and Reeps in Congress, it is not an issue in and of itself like it was in the 1990's ... mainly because Ross Perot is not around.

 

If by "no" you mean "yes," you're correct.

You know that clip the Reeps play of John Kerry saying he voted for the $87B before he voted against it? He voted FOR the Dem. version that paid for the aid to Iraq by taking back some of Bush's tax cuts, and voted AGAINST the version that just put the whole thing on the credit card.

 

I think this is where the phrase "the soft bigotry of low expectations" comes into play.

 

I have only heard John Kerry say that the tax cuts are wrong because they go to the wrong people. I think he will be better on fiscal responsibility than Bush (hard to be worse) but I have not heard Kerry say that a balanced budget (or smaller deficit) or the national debt an important issue. If he has said it, the message isn't getting out very clearly. As far as I can tell, there are very few budget hawks left in Washington.

 

Don't know if your trying to have a pop at the UK or not here but FYI no national debts can be repaid, it's impossible. Have a look at a graph of national debts, anyone's will do. Up, up, up, up they go. Sooner or later though...

 

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/economy/fiscal_responsibility.html

 

It's a part of a larger inherent flaw which only looks good/bad when you don't know the reason for it, over long periods you HAVE to have deficits in a growing economy to increase the money supply if not you have recession, who presides over them is irrelevent.

 

Here's one quote from Kerry's website:

"John Kerry and John Edwards know how to spend responsibly, and they believe that Americans deserve to expect more than record deficits and reckless spending. In their first term, they will cut the deficit in half and cut taxes for middle-class Americans and small businesses while funding better, more affordable health care for all Americans, improving our schools, and securing our country."

In 1980, George Herbert Walker Bush called this voodoo economics.

Here's a second quote:

"Restrain Spending Growth. John Kerry and John Edwards are committed to ensuring that domestic discretionary spending does not grow faster than inflation. (This excludes defense, homeland security, health, education, Medicare, Social Security, and other mandatory programs)."

Any idea how much discretionary spending is left if the budget deficit is cut 1/2 and these programs can have increases over inflation? I don't. I don't think John Kerry does either.

Until I hear Kerry come out for something that is either unpopular with a large voting block (like means-testing social security or even just raising the age threshold to 70) or politically risky (cutting defense), I'm going to assume his statements on the budget aren't very useful or honest.

 

But now is 2004. See the difference? Also, are you going to give a Republican congress their share of the credit for 1993-2000?

 

Huh?

Kerry is on record for repealing the tax cuts that have been given to the upper class. That will raise revenue to reduce the deficit.