Joel Achenbach on the 2000s: The decade we didn't see coming:
At the start of the decade, prosperity reigned, there was a budget surplus, and housing prices were on the rise. Then we got bogged down in overseas wars, the economy tanked, and we gave up much of our privacy for the convenience of the Internet. Here's a look back at the decade and the moments that defined it.
By Joel Achenbach
Sunday, December 27, 2009 - The Washington Post
"The decade began so swimmingly. No Y2K bug, no terrorism, nothing but lots of fireworks as the planet turned and, time zone by time zone, all the zeroes replaced the nines.
America was at peace. Prosperity reigned. The popular president soon announced a budget surplus of $230 billion. The dilemma for Washington lawmakers was what to do with all the extra money."
Where on Earth do Conservatives get the idea that President Clinton did not leave this country with a huge budget surplus? Bush couldn't squander that surplus fast enough. Do Conservatives have any contact at all with the real world?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
"And as for the Republicans: now that their policies of tax cuts and deregulation have led us into an economic quagmire, their prescription for recovery is — tax cuts and deregulation.
So let’s bid a not at all fond farewell to the Big Zero — the decade in which we achieved nothing and learned nothing. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/28/opinion/28krugman.html?_r=1
Another great one by Krugman. But we all know cons don't read very much, except the fairy tales that make them feel oh so good.
CJP, I am probably throwing the cons a bone here. Let me know what you think.
The unemployment insurance expenditure is getting out of control. I think the Feds need to quit subsidizing the states with unemployment extensions. I don't think the unemployed have enough incentive, while on unemployment, to get a job, that would most likely pay less than what they are used to and close to what they receive in benefits. We have to force the issue at some point. They will have to work for less.
I still blame the crazy cons for getting us into this mess with their stupid tax cuts for the rich, deregulating the money grubbers, and w the idiot telling individuals to spend spend spend, as that spending fuels the economy. Right dumb-asses, spending fuels the economy until the spenders go broke.
And in anticipation of BBs tired logic, I know the government is also spending to stimulate the economy. But they can print money. And inflation is nowhere in sight.
I think we need these extended unemployment benefits until the job market improves.
Since Obama will be focusing on job creation in early 2010, he will probably be able to take action to create more jobs pretty quickly.
Of course, changing the Senate rules to require 55 votes instead of 60 votes to accomplish anything would be a very important reform for our country. That would certainly help get things done.
"But they can print money. And inflation is nowhere in sight."
-Raygun
Not yet...
"Of course, changing the Senate rules to require 55 votes instead of 60 votes to accomplish anything would be a very important reform for our country. That would certainly help get things done."
-CJP
Why do you want congress walking all over American citizens? Why dont we increase the number of votes required? That way the only bills that could get passed would be favored by the largest majority and would be for the general welfare!
"Where on Earth do Conservatives get the idea that President Clinton did not leave this country with a huge budget surplus?"
-CJP
Why did the national debt increase about 36% or $1.5 trillion during Clintons presidency? Every single year it increased, so how can you say he had extra cash laying around?
Raygun-
I hope you havent had to make any lay offs! My employers unemployment tax just jumped up from a 1/2% to 6%.
Does that make since to a liberal like yourself, raise taxes on companies who are laying off employees? Will that help create jobs?
source: http://www.esd.wa.gov/newsandinformation/releases/recession-raises-unemployment-tax-rates.php
No, that doesn't help. I don't see the sense of raising taxes on employers who have to lay off people.
I think the state needs to cut jobs or cut salaries. On second thought, they need to cut salaries for sure. State jobs are now good jobs, considering the benefits and the retirement and the salary. Sorry, times have changed. That's not completely the cons fault.
"Every single year it increased"
--
Lets see your proof please. And not proof from Faux News. Proof from a reputable source.
""Every single year it increased"
--
Lets see your proof please. And not proof from Faux News. Proof from a reputable source."
-Raygun
Here you go! Now answer my other questions!
Source: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
"Where on Earth do Conservatives get the idea that President Clinton did not leave this country with a huge budget surplus?"
-CJP
Why did the national debt increase about 36% or $1.5 trillion during Clintons presidency? Every single year it increased, so how can you say he had extra cash laying around?
Sorry BB,
Type in Oct 30, 1999 to Sept 1, 2000.
Went from 5,679 trillion down to 5,676 trillion.
"Every single year it increased"
I am still right! There was an increase both years.
Fiscal year.
Post a Comment