Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
I don't want to be a dick here, but this line illustrates the full magnitude of just how little you understand the topic. While the year-2000 budget showed a small surplus for that year, the overall US debt was still in the trillions - in fact, it was nearly $6 trillion. Every other year of Clinton's presidency showed an increase in the deficit, indicating that the year-2000 surplus was likely a "gimmick" heading into a contentious election cycle.
Bush shows a strong deficit increase throughout his terms, but it is actually fairly similar to the Reaganomics boom era, and this by itself shouldn't be considered damning (read up on why nations engage in deficit spending if you'd like to continue along these lines).
Your points are disingenuous and specious, in addition to showing a knack for confusing causation and correlation.
|
From the same source you lifted the chart from (without providing any attribution,) here's the clarification of the chart -
"This is a study of the spending habits of our presidents since 1938.
It shows that Conservative Presidents out borrow and spend Democratic Presidents almost 3 to 1. Just looking at the graph at the beginning of the study tells a powerful story: In the last 30 years, if you wanted a President to be fiscally responsible, you had better vote for a Democrat. Admittedly this study has the bias of a deficit hawk, but
here are the facts, you can draw your own conclusions (the link points to an Excel spreadsheet, obviously if you do not have Excel this link will not work)."
"Most of the negative feedback received on the original paper concerned the lack of the comparison of the GDP to the national debt. To correct this oversight the last update added a section on this topic. The most recent dismal debt data was added and the percentages and analysis adjusted accordingly. "
"Addressed in the latest version is the role of Congress in the amassing of our debt. Both the right and the left may be surprised by the facts here.
I was shocked to see how far this document has spread. If you do a Yahoo or Google search for "United States National Debt" (with the quote marks) this study comes up on the first page. I am guessing that is why it is referenced on dozens of other web sites. Both professors and students have used the graphs in colleges across the county. I should have copy righted this one." - Steve McGourty
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/Bush_opinion.htm
Which of my points, specifically, are "disingenuous and specious, in addition to showing a knack for confusing causation and correlation" and why, specifically, do you feel that way?