And why is "reducing" the deficit to $250,000,000,000 considered
"good news?" Remember, Bush had a surplus when he took office.
2006-10-12 13:13:48 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It is some of that voodoo economics that is left over from the horrible 80's the last time that the debt rose at an alarming rate. People tend to forget. To answer your question it is not a good economy. High unemployment an alarming stock market. Housing starts down. Home sales stagnant, all of these things point to a recession. Supply side economics is the problem here. Tax cuts for the very rich do very little to stimulate the economy and it always results in an recession, this time is no exception, if it wasn't for the feeding of the war machine we could be in a full blown depression at this time.
2006-10-12 13:30:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Two things happened. 1.) the economy that started to crash at the end of Clinton's term actually crashed. 2.) Bush spends too much money.
So the surplus vanished because the economy tanked. Then Bush has us in the hole because he never vetoes anything!
2006-10-12 20:18:13 · answer #2 · answered by WJ 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Is the GOP to blame for 9/11? most of the debt is for security, and the war in Iraq, Afghanistan
2006-10-12 20:18:26 · answer #3 · answered by 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
GOP considers $8,500,000,000,000 is a good economy because they anticipated that it would have been $800,500,000,000,000. Any number that looks smaller than $8,500,000,000,000 is good news regardless....even if it's $67,400,000,000,000.
2006-10-12 20:21:06 · answer #4 · answered by sarkatick 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That's bankrupted, and most of the debt is to Communist China.
2006-10-12 20:28:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
bush is so dumb he cant add. He has sold the USA to foreign countries most of who are Arabs.
2006-10-12 20:25:48 · answer #6 · answered by teddybear 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
a lib scare tactic? Nobody said it was "good" but the lying left
2006-10-12 20:17:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
because they were pushing for 10 trillion
2006-10-12 20:25:34 · answer #8 · answered by King Midas 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I would give you a reasonable answer, but your a liberal.
2006-10-12 20:17:37 · answer #9 · answered by Ah Ha 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋