letter to the President

[Dru]

There has always been kind of a gentlemen's agreement that an ex-president doesn't criticize his successor, but Bill Clinton has apparently seen enough of George Bush. The 42nd president was sharply critical of the 43rd president during a televised interview Sunday, accusing the Bush administration of going to war in Iraq "virtually alone and before U.N. inspections were completed, with no real urgency, (and) no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction." Clinton also lambasted Bush's handling of the Katrina aftermath, saying the failure to evacuate New Orleans in the face of the coming hurricane was inexcusable. And he had harsh words for Bush's voodoo economics: "What Americans need to understand is that ... every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and our tax cuts. We have never done this before. Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else."

 

[ChrisT]

I love that Clinton spoke out but I can't help but think that it's a calculated political ploy to bring attention to the Clintons in advance of Hillary's 2008 presidential bid. That's how suspicious of politicians I've become.

[Fairweather]

 

Hell, the last "liberal/democrat" government didn't have a balanced budget either, they ran a fucking surplus!!!!! And actually left the country in the black.

 

 

I think you should read up a little before you go a spoutin'. This country hasn't been in the black for decades. Including the Clinton years. You are making the (too) common mistake of confusing deficit and debt. True, there was ONE year at the end of Clinton's term when the US government ran a budget surplus, but rather than dedicate any portion to retiring the then-5trillion dollar national debt, both sides began plotting how to either spend it on social programs (Clinton), or cut taxes(Republican congress).

 

That said, Bush's fiscal policy is an absolute fucking mess. I still think his first tax cut was necessary to stimulate the lagging economy left by Clinton, but the second tax cut was not necessary. Additionally, I think both of his tax cuts should be now repealed, or at least allowed to sunset.

 

I am now certain that ANY administration, Dem or Rep, will continue to spend this nation toward economic collapse....and all in the name of giving us what we want in return for our vote. The only way to avoid this is to reduce our national debt to a managable 2(?) or 3(?) trillion dollars. The economic growth...that brings in the extra revenue...that just keeps getting squandered by all! Spending cuts and/or higher taxes. Seems like the only answer.

 

 

....And please spare me the cost-of-Iraq blather. While it aint cheap, it accounts for only about one-fourth of last years total budget deficit. The rest? Entitlements/social programs.

[foraker]

I am now certain that ANY administration, Dem or Rep, will continue to spend this nation toward economic collapse

 

There's a talking point I think we can all agree on.

[archenemy]

 

Hell, the last "liberal/democrat" government didn't have a balanced budget either, they ran a fucking surplus!!!!! And actually left the country in the black.

 

 

I think you should read up a little before you go a spoutin'. This country hasn't been in the black for decades. Including the Clinton years. You are making the (too) common mistake of confusing deficit and debt. True, there was ONE year at the end of Clinton's term when the US government ran a budget surplus, but rather than dedicate any portion to retiring the then-5trillion dollar national debt, both sides began plotting how to either spend it on social programs (Clinton), or cut taxes(Republican congress).

 

That said, Bush's fiscal policy is an absolute fucking mess. I still think his first tax cut was necessary to stimulate the lagging economy left by Clinton, but the second tax cut was not necessary. Additionally, I think both of his tax cuts should be now repealed, or at least allowed to sunset.

 

I am now certain that ANY administration, Dem or Rep, will continue to spend this nation toward economic collapse....and all in the name of giving us what we want in return for our vote. The only way to avoid this is to reduce our national debt to a managable 2(?) or 3(?) trillion dollars. The economic growth...that brings in the extra revenue...that just keeps getting squandered by all! Spending cuts and/or higher taxes. Seems like the only answer.

 

 

....And please spare me the cost-of-Iraq blather. While it aint cheap, it accounts for only about one-fourth of last years total budget deficit. The rest? Entitlements/social programs.

 

It is a little hasty to blame our country's economic state on whatever president is in office. Alhtough the president submits a proposal (along with the cabinet dept and all the independ agencies), it is the House and the Senate that draft the resolution. Then it goes through the appropriation process. So a lot of people besides Bush have influence on the budget, its not just up to one guy who believes in supply-side economics.

 

Our 2006 mid year budget was something like 2600 billion. 990 bil was for discretionary spending and 1,400 for mandatory (the rest goes to interest). So we don't even spend double the amount on social entitlements that we do on war, security, etc. Sure, the percentages between them waver from year to year, but that follows need and makes sense.

 

I think how government spends money is not nearly as big of a problem as the fact that the increase in their spending has outpaced the increase in household income. I think this fact makes tax increases less possible as time goes on (assuming we stay in the same trajectory). Spending cuts occur frequently, and don't seem to do enough. What about increasing our GDP?