User avatar
By eriknben10
#491833
Back then even Time and the New York Times published the good news occasionally.
User avatar
By Ryan
#491834
re: the Horse & Sparrow

Like a good little Keynesian libtard, you presume that all nutrients come from government, all economic activities are consumer centric and that our businesses and citizenry, like the horse and sparrow, are completely dependent on being fed by the government. The horse and sparrow analogy perfectly describes the utopia that the leftist dreams of, were all sustenance comes from government. Only in that scenario do we begin to talk about how much feed we should be GIVING to the horse.

You apparently don't know the first thing about supply side economics.
User avatar
By Stinky Pete
#491835
I'm not an economist, but I think the national debt increases because revenue doesn't cover expenses. If you cut taxes, you have to have a plan to cover the gap.



eriknben10 wrote:That was because all the money they raked in during those boom times was squandered away by congress. Economic prosperity and jobs were at all time highs and the gubberment was raking in more money than ever. Regan and dotcom set the stage for Clinton administration to look like a genius.
I think this time is different because the economy isn't nearly as bad as when those two used supply-side. This may be the test to see how it works during the current glut of stagnation.
User avatar
By eriknben10
#491837
The national debt has increased for every president. So much so these days is it has no effect on much of anything. It is more or less an imaginary number. It is a proven fact that supply-side economics works. What remains to be seen is if the government can get it's out of control spending under wraps, that is if they want to decrease the national debt. Barring any war with Rocket boy, I think it may eventually decrease. Regardless if the national debt increases or decreases the economy will continue to give more people a chance at supporting themselves.
User avatar
By JuneCarter
#491838
Ryan wrote:re: the Horse & Sparrow

Like a good little Keynesian libtard, you presume that all nutrients come from government, all economic activities are consumer centric and that our businesses and citizenry, like the horse and sparrow, are completely dependent on being fed by the government. The horse and sparrow analogy perfectly describes the utopia that the leftist dreams of, were all sustenance comes from government. Only in that scenario do we begin to talk about how much feed we should be GIVING to the horse.

You apparently don't know the first thing about supply side economics.


Can you make it through a conversation without calling people names and insulting them you --censor--?!
User avatar
By Stinky Pete
#491843
eriknben10 wrote:The national debt has increased for every president.


Reagan tripled it. (Slightly less than tripled if you want to be picky)
User avatar
By eriknben10
#491845
Stinky Pete wrote:
eriknben10 wrote:The national debt has increased for every president.


Reagan tripled it. (Slightly less than tripled if you want to be picky)


Like I said it doesn't indicate anything really other than it increased. If you look at it as a percentage like I know you like to do. Look at what percentage Roosevelt increased it, he added $236 billion, a 1,048 percent increase from the $23 billion debt at the end of Hoover's last budget, FY 1933
Regan on the other hand added $1.86 trillion, a 186 percent increase from the $998 billion debt at the end of Carter's last budget, FY 1981.