I don’t find it funny. Maybe because there’s so much more to the story than what the comic says. And perhaps because I work with a bunch of union Democrats who can’t use logic to find their way out of a box.
Simple explanation, when Republicans are in office, they cut taxes and fail to pass any legislation cutting government spending like they promise, hence the deficits. When Democrats are in office, they raise taxes, hence the surplus.
The presidents rarely have much to do with the deficit or surplus that exists during their terms. For instance, in Bill Clinton’s case, the surplus was due to huge tax collections from the dot-com boom. In fact, deficits/surpluses have more to do with the policies enacted by the administrations (specifically the Fed) BEFORE they took office.
I never said union people are ALL Democrats, but the ones I work with are, and they are frightening. I never said a deficit was good, was just trying to offer some explanation as to why this stuff happens. Meg probably did that a little better.
Politics does indeed make interesting bedfellows (to not exactly coin a phrase). Meg’s explanation is the standard Republican one, but it hugely oversimplifies the situation. Shrub inherited a a surplus, and proceeded to dissipate it on profoundly wrong-headed enterprises. We never needed to have the kind of deficit he has given us, even if the sliding economy was bound to happen.
It would probably surprise Casey to know that Clinton actually cut the welfare rolls while in office.
I’m in a union, I’m a Democrat, and I’m proud of both. With any luck, we’ll get a Democratic president and start the recovery.
Nope, Meg’s answer is oversimplified. Yes one reason it might never happen is the coincidence with the boom of the internet.
But let’s see in 10 years if we have a surplus because of all these tax cuts.
Actually the first Bush raised taxes and yet the US was still in debt. Remember “read my lips, I won’t raise taxes…” And thus he was voted out.
So all that proves is raising taxes while not trimming the budget doesn’t solve ANYTHING. So you have to do both. Or else GB should have been less in debt than Reagan.
Also if you notice, all Republicans are “Fiscal Conservatives” but Democrats are “tax and spend liberals.”
Leave a Comment
Custom Search
Sponsored Links
Need extra cash for emergency bill but payday is too far away? NationalPayday.com can help with a cash advance up to $600.
The Thrifty Scot searches over 500 loans to find the best option to suit your finances.
Search over 1000 secured loan and remortgage options with Loansite.
6 responses so far ↓
1 Casey // Aug 30, 2008 at 11:44 am
I don’t find it funny. Maybe because there’s so much more to the story than what the comic says. And perhaps because I work with a bunch of union Democrats who can’t use logic to find their way out of a box.
Simple explanation, when Republicans are in office, they cut taxes and fail to pass any legislation cutting government spending like they promise, hence the deficits. When Democrats are in office, they raise taxes, hence the surplus.
2 LivingAlmostLarge // Aug 30, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Casey, I hate to break it to you but many union people are republican and they can’t find their way out of a box either.
And I recall our last recession was with the first Bush and now we’re in it with the second Bush. I didn’t vote for him and I’m tired of this.
Sorry but how is a deficit good?
3 Meg // Aug 30, 2008 at 11:22 pm
The presidents rarely have much to do with the deficit or surplus that exists during their terms. For instance, in Bill Clinton’s case, the surplus was due to huge tax collections from the dot-com boom. In fact, deficits/surpluses have more to do with the policies enacted by the administrations (specifically the Fed) BEFORE they took office.
4 Casey // Aug 31, 2008 at 10:15 am
I never said union people are ALL Democrats, but the ones I work with are, and they are frightening. I never said a deficit was good, was just trying to offer some explanation as to why this stuff happens. Meg probably did that a little better.
5 Grace // Aug 31, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Politics does indeed make interesting bedfellows (to not exactly coin a phrase). Meg’s explanation is the standard Republican one, but it hugely oversimplifies the situation. Shrub inherited a a surplus, and proceeded to dissipate it on profoundly wrong-headed enterprises. We never needed to have the kind of deficit he has given us, even if the sliding economy was bound to happen.
It would probably surprise Casey to know that Clinton actually cut the welfare rolls while in office.
I’m in a union, I’m a Democrat, and I’m proud of both. With any luck, we’ll get a Democratic president and start the recovery.
6 LivingAlmostLarge // Aug 31, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Nope, Meg’s answer is oversimplified. Yes one reason it might never happen is the coincidence with the boom of the internet.
But let’s see in 10 years if we have a surplus because of all these tax cuts.
Actually the first Bush raised taxes and yet the US was still in debt. Remember “read my lips, I won’t raise taxes…” And thus he was voted out.
So all that proves is raising taxes while not trimming the budget doesn’t solve ANYTHING. So you have to do both. Or else GB should have been less in debt than Reagan.
Also if you notice, all Republicans are “Fiscal Conservatives” but Democrats are “tax and spend liberals.”
Leave a Comment