Let me suggest it is the long term trend that is im****tant, not what one or
more Presdients did during their term in office. It does very little
good,
"if" a President has a budget surplus for some of the years they were in
office, "if" future Presidents and future memebers of Congress, wipe out
any
gains that anyone else achieves.
Besides, what happened in the past is not im****tant, what is im****tant is
what the next President will do, what future members of Congress does,
that
is im****tant. The National Debt was not created by any one President or
any
one Congress, it was created by a long series of deficit spending. That
is
one reason that the national debt has steadily increased over the years.
So, if you are really concerned about the issue, find out what the next
President, whoever that may be, has said about what they are going to do
about deficit spending, and a reduction of the national debt. Because
nothing can change if the next President or the next Congress has not
pledged to address the problem.
"2.7182818284590..." <tangent1.57@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:cf47ffcd-2250-443c-980a-4cd94880f7e1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>i even find it very interesting that even JFK and LBJ both had
> surpluses!
>
> also, note how fast truman reduced the debt given all that debt
> interest?
>
> GWB isn't as bad as I thought, but he still sucks.
>
> this makes me re-evaluate ronald reagan.
|
