Remember that budget surplus he inherited? Where is that now???
Worst fiscal reversal in history. Unfortunately, this is not a temporary deficit resulting from an economic slowdown or the costs of the war on terrorism. Instead, the Administration is proposing deficits as far as the eye can see. The $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus that President Bush inherited is now a deficit of more than $2 trillion, for a total fiscal reversal of well over $7 trillion.
This change in our fiscal outlook will mean that we will have $5 trillion more national debt in 2008 than previously expected, roughly $17,000 for every American. That will force the federal government to compete with private businesses for investment capital, hampering future economic growth by increasing interest rates and diverting funds from the private sector.
2007-08-06 09:24:09 · 14 answers · asked by El Duderino 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
well, lets see.
He wants tax cuts for the rich and big business--check
he wants subsidies for big business--check
he loves war--check
he loves to spend money on military affairs--check
He hates anything that helps the underprivileged in this country, such as the poor or the elderly---check
he is a theocrat and believes there is no separation of church and state---check
his view is that the voice of the majority is irrelevant---check
and on and on......
YES......I would say that the Bush years have shown us the essence of what the GOP stands for. As further proof, I will submit the fact that during the Bush years the GOP congress controlled the House and the senate...and they rarely challenged him on anything....in fact, they worked well together and the GOP controlled legislative branch rubber stamped Bush on nearly everything and did not have one single investigation of his administration.
The answer is a resounding YESSSSSS !!!!!
2007-08-06 09:42:51 · answer #1 · answered by me 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"That will force the federal government to compete with private businesses for investment capital, hampering future economic growth by increasing interest rates and diverting funds from the private sector."
Therein lies the problem with your analysis. The tax cuts are allowing business to make more, and also grow more so in the future they'll be making even more and paying more in taxes, and then make even more and pay more in taxes, and make even more and pay more in taxes.... at least that's the idea. Eventually taxes will have to go up, but this seems to be working for now.
As for your question though, no Bush is the exact opposite of conservative fiscal ideals.
2007-08-06 09:28:38 · answer #2 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
reliable, we could see. interior the suitable 8 years usa has spent all our surplus and borrowed over 2 billion money an afternoon from China & distinctive international places. We glided by using potential of two recessions in 8 years and a couple of wars that would nicely be very luxury. Now which you would be able to experience what you have written yet go searching, open your eyes after which you extremely does not could ask what "economic mess" that the GOP won us into. BTW could you call a million majority democrat control then DUDE you're becoming some severe subjects. What did you push aside you were in POLITICS. you plenty can circulate that off on your jr. severe classmates although that doesn't bypass with the circulate outstanding right here.
2016-10-09 08:45:10 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wrong, wrong and more wrong. The Clinton claim of a balanced budget was a fraud. It was a paper projection based on fudged figures. The deficits are caused by Congress spending more than the government takes in, in tax revenues. The projected deficit this year is $212 billion. If there was a way to control spending, it could easily be eliminated.
I think the national debt is a concept too difficult for you to understand. Talk to a conservative economist.
2007-08-06 09:30:02 · answer #4 · answered by regerugged 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
No, he does not. I have been appalled at some of his spending and I am not talking about spending on the war.
I believe that in the beginning he approved some funding in order to try and make nice with the libs. Although it never did, it does seem to have given him the habit of shopping.
2007-08-06 09:29:12 · answer #5 · answered by halestrm 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, he's not a Reagan Conservative when it comes to fiscal responsibility. He showed some promise with tax cuts but unfortunately he didn't do much to rein in pork barrel spending.
2007-08-06 09:28:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
the popping of the phony tech bubble had to happen. it was neither clintons or bushes fault. but the economic boon that has transpired since is real.
we have our lowest unemployment in decades, the deficit has been reduced the last three years running. three digit increases in the stock market are so routine that they dont even make the news now. taxes have been reduced for every citizen and US revenue is higher than ever in history.
...yes.
2007-08-06 09:39:43 · answer #7 · answered by karl k 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
That's nothing.
Wait till the Socialist Democrats get through with us.
Check the latest business news: the deficit is dropping like a lead balloon.
And our wages are going up!!!
Most Democrats don't work, so they are missing out.
2007-08-06 09:32:19 · answer #8 · answered by wolf 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Does Hillary Clinton represent true democratic ideals?
2007-08-06 09:31:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It has already begun. Try to get a home loan even with good credit.
2007-08-06 09:35:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋