Time To Stop Wasting Everyone's Time, Bernie

[downbeatplumb]

You mean a replay of the time when the books were balanced and terrorism was "over there".

We've only had zero debt once in our history and it was for one day, January 8, 1835.  We've always had domestic terrorism.

He reduced the debt by 10%, quite an achievement.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Honestly, I'd say Trump vs. Clinton is really the end of democracy, as their positions are so fucking close that it would be a 1-party election for practical purposes.

Disagree. If you're were talking about most Republicans you'd have a point, but Trump's positions are so odious that even the Republican hierarchy is disowning him.

You're talking to a guy who twenty years ago said that he'd never vote for Hilary ... but a Trump presidency would be an unmitigated disaster for America. I will vote for Hilary if the standings are close on election day. Trump isn't fit to preside over an abandoned catbox.

[CapnAwesome]

We've only had zero debt once in our history and it was for one day, January 8, 1835.  We've always had domestic terrorism.

He reduced the debt by 10%, quite an achievement.

What world are you living in? The debt was 4,411,488,883,139.38 when Bill Clinton became president and
5,807,463,412,200.06 when he left.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/repo...histo5.htm

That's an increase of 31%.  There was one year of a surplus mostly caused by the tech boom that gave rise to all sorts of goofy myths about Bill Clinton being responsible for all sorts of economy myths mostly believed in by diehard Clinton supports that can be dismissed with 2 seconds of using google.

[downbeatplumb]

From Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_p...ll_Clinton

President Clinton oversaw a period of considerable economic growth and expansion during his tenure. In particular, real GDP per capita increased from about $38,000 in 1994 to about $45,000 in 2001 (in real 2011 dollars).[1] The U.S. national debt as a percent of GDP also declined from about 66% to about 56% during Clinton's government.

[The easiest way to look at the macroeconomic effects of Clinton’s presidency is to look at three main points: gross domestic product (GDP), inflation rates, and unemployment rates.

The national debt per capita rose from approximately $16,000 to $20,000 during Bill Clinton's presidency.[14] Clinton took the deficit of 4.7% of GDP in 1992 and turned it into a surplus of 2.4% of GDP in 2000[citation needed]. Federal spending fell to 18.4 percent of GDP. in 2000 from 22.2 percent in 1992[citation needed]. Although Clinton raised taxes in 1993, he cut them in 1997[citation needed].

Clinton also lowered inflation rates down to 2.3%[citation needed]. HOW DOES A PRESIDENT DO THIS? Democratic presidents had an average of about double that rate, and Republicans had even higher rates (Burns and Taylor 389). This lowering of interest rates contributed greatly to the good economic health exhibited during Clinton’s presidency.

The unemployment rate in the Unites States when Clinton was sworn into office was 6.9%. The lowest unemployment rate during his presidency was 4% in the year 2000. When he was sworn out of office in 2001, the unemployment rate was 4.7%.[15] More jobs were created per month during the Clinton presidency than during any other presidency in U.S. history.

So I got the facts from there.

[CapnAwesome]

From Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_p...ll_Clinton

President Clinton oversaw a period of considerable economic growth and expansion during his tenure. In particular, real GDP per capita increased from about $38,000 in 1994 to about $45,000 in 2001 (in real 2011 dollars).[1] The U.S. national debt as a percent of GDP also declined from about 66% to about 56% during Clinton's government.

[The easiest way to look at the macroeconomic effects of Clinton’s presidency is to look at three main points: gross domestic product (GDP), inflation rates, and unemployment rates.

The national debt per capita rose from approximately $16,000 to $20,000 during Bill Clinton's presidency.[14] Clinton took the deficit of 4.7% of GDP in 1992 and turned it into a surplus of 2.4% of GDP in 2000[citation needed]. Federal spending fell to 18.4 percent of GDP. in 2000 from 22.2 percent in 1992[citation needed]. Although Clinton raised taxes in 1993, he cut them in 1997[citation needed].

Clinton also lowered inflation rates down to 2.3%[citation needed]. HOW DOES A PRESIDENT DO THIS? Democratic presidents had an average of about double that rate, and Republicans had even higher rates (Burns and Taylor 389). This lowering of interest rates contributed greatly to the good economic health exhibited during Clinton’s presidency.

The unemployment rate in the Unites States when Clinton was sworn into office was 6.9%. The lowest unemployment rate during his presidency was 4% in the year 2000. When he was sworn out of office in 2001, the unemployment rate was 4.7%.[15] More jobs were created per month during the Clinton presidency than during any other presidency in U.S. history.

So I got the facts from there.

Nowhere in there does it say that he reduced the debt by 10%.

[downbeatplumb]

President Clinton oversaw a period of considerable economic growth and expansion during his tenure. In particular, real GDP per capita increased from about $38,000 in 1994 to about $45,000 in 2001 (in real 2011 dollars). The U.S. national debt as a percent of GDP also declined from about 66% to about 56% during Clinton's government.

Do you see it now?

[Wyrd of Gawd]

President Clinton oversaw a period of considerable economic growth and expansion during his tenure. In particular, real GDP per capita increased from about $38,000 in 1994 to about $45,000 in 2001 (in real 2011 dollars). The U.S. national debt as a percent of GDP also declined from about 66% to about 56% during Clinton's government.

Do you see it now?

Your conclusion is 100% incorrect.  The actual national debt in dollars increased every year when Clinton was President.  https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/repo...histo4.htm

[Chad32]

With Bill I think it was supposed to be the deficit. Not the debt. Meaning the amount of money we lost every year went down, though the debt continued going up.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

With Bill I think it was supposed to be the deficit. Not the debt. Meaning the amount of money we lost every year went down, though the debt continued going up.

It's possible to reduce the deficit provided you cut non-mandatory spending.  In most cases that's not a good idea because you will end up hurting a lot of vulnerable people.

http://economicsonlinetutor.com/pics/Fed...20z002.png

The deficit exists because the Congress Critters won't raise taxes to cover all of their obligations.  So they borrow money to make up the difference and that's the deficit.  The more they borrow the greater the national debt becomes and because they are always borrowing money the national debt continues to grow and is never reduced.

[Chad32]

With Bill I think it was supposed to be the deficit. Not the debt. Meaning the amount of money we lost every year went down, though the debt continued going up.

It's possible to reduce the deficit provided you cut non-mandatory spending.  In most cases that's not a good idea because you will end up hurting a lot of vulnerable people.

http://economicsonlinetutor.com/pics/Fed...20z002.png

The deficit exists because the Congress Critters won't raise taxes to cover all of their obligations.  So they borrow money to make up the difference and that's the deficit.  The more they borrow the greater the national debt becomes and because they are always borrowing money the national debt continues to grow and is never reduced.

Yeah, they'd rather raise the debt ceiling than do something to lower the debt.