Just think....Five years ago we were predicted to have $5 trillion surplus

[kentuck]

right now. What happened? Oh, 9/11 happened right? No, what happened was George W Bush and the Republican Party. Now it is all gone. Not only is it all gone, but they have added $3 trillion more in debt on top of that. That would be an $8 trillion dollar turnaround in just 5 short years. Just think of the "progress" we can make if we can keep the Repubs in power for 5 - 10 more years? Vote Republican!

[yourout]

1. And how much of that surplus ended up in the hands of Haliburton?

And how much of it is fattening the portfolios of the rich and famous?

[MetaTrope]

11. And how much is going straight to PNAC covert ops?

[sakabatou]

2. Imagine all that money going into domestic projects

:drool:

[sandnsea]

3. And it was FICA surplus

That's right, OUR tax money gone to the richest in the country. And now WE are supposed to sacrifice more because Bush created a debt when everybody knew this money was going to be needed for boomers' retirements. Biggest heist in the history of the world.

[kentuck]

4. Now they tell us the Social Security is in trouble ??

No shit Sherlock !

[sandnsea]

7. 700 Billionaires, the real "700 Club"

700 Billionaires around the globe, 300 in the US. That's the real "sucking sound" we hear. One way or another, they suck every penny out of us. We may think we're saving up for retirement or some such, but they suck it right back out in health care or stock market crashes. Crashes that happen AFTER they already moved their money to the next "big thing".

I just read an article that Bush wants the Bonneville Power Surplus to go to paying down the debt. The public power that works, where any savings were used to reduce power rates, and he wants to suck it up too. Seattle WTO and Little Beirut ain't gonna stand for that, not for one second.

I hate these people.

[kentuck]

8. Anything to keep from asking for the taxcuts to be returned....

Because, to ask or not ask, does not matter. It is still a stark admission of failure of policy...

[Sparkly]

16. Yup -- most sold the next generation out to a single trip to Wal-Mart. nt

[tiptoe]

5. And they did it by Election Fraud and Lies and Mass-Murder and Treason.

[Skittles]

6. the party of fiscal responsibility

:puke:

[depakid]

9. Love to rally round that but-

That figure was based on projections that wouldn't have come close to bearing out.

Not that Bush and the Republicans' irrational and irresponsible fiscal and monetary policies haven't made things exponentially worse than they would have been....

Also, note that Gore was yapping about tax cuts, too. Obviously, they would have been smaller and more equitably distributed- but they'd have "downsized" the surplus- alongside the recession (which, arguably- Clinton's regulatory mismanagement of the financial and energy sectors had a hand in).

Just tryin' to be accurate here...

[kentuck]

10. Also, Bush said it was the "people's money"...

and that they could give the taxcuts and still have a balanced budget. But both Parties accepted the $5 trillion dollar number...

[Sparkly]

13. Oh yeah, "Tax cuts always increase revenues!"

Some are probably STILL saying that...

They also don't understand the difference between budget deficits and the national debt -- so when Chimpy says, "We're gonna cut the deficit in half in four years" or whatever, they think he's talking about the national DEBT, not basic ongoing shortfalls in the budget that are adding to that debt.

In short, too many voters are ignorant from deception and have NO idea what the national debt costs them in their tax dollar, or who caused it or how -- much easier to rant against the pittance on the dollar that so-called "welfare queens" and "lazy liberals seeking free handouts" cost. :mad:

[Sparkly]

12. Big difference between "targets" in tax cuts

Gore's proposed tax cuts were wisely targeted to keep the economy growing, by keeping the middle class growing, keeping opportunities growing, and keeping research and development growing (especially for alternative energy sources, auto technology, etc.).

One of the things Clinton was great at was explaining expenditures in terms of "investments." 'For every dollar we invest in urban renewal (or education or job training etc etc), we get X amount back in the economy.' He was right, and Gore was right on track to deal with the deflation of the tech bubble by supporting new industries (especially ones that would also help the environment, employment, and dependence on foreign oil).

It's painful to think of how different it all could be now... :(

[depakid]

14. No argument there

My only point was that we ought to be realistic about the projections.

And yes, it is painful- :mad:

Not to mention that it's going to turn out so phenomenally bad that even a lot of the freepers are going to wake up one day and have an oh my f...ing God moment. Losing your money tends to do that, even to the densest among us.

[Sparkly]

15. Yes indeed.

I remember arguing with some of them on old AOL boards (where you hear the most simplistic RNC talking points repeated verbatim, over and over), and they'd say, "If you don't want the tax cuts, and you're worried about the debt, then send them to Washington DC!"

Oh how brilliant. I told them I was socking it away, because I knew what was coming next. Poor short-sighted idiots -- they didn't. And since they remain oblivious to the effects of the debt, many still don't. Maybe they'll get it from the upcoming budget cuts...

I agree with you. "Where's my government loans, my veteran's benefits, my job? Why are my roads crappy, why is my library closing, why are the schools cutting programs? Why are my parents suffering, why are my fuel costs so high, why is healthcare unaffordable?" (Of course, most will blame it, somehow, on Democrats -- Rove will make sure of that.)