Can Hillary Get the US back to A Surplus Like Bill Clinton Did?

After all we'll have Bill Clinton AND Hillary in the White House.

Is the US budget to far gone this time for Hillary to get it back to a surplus from a deficit?
Attachments:

Not unless she has her own version of Newt Gringrich to push her to do the right thing. Oh, and some sort of transformational technology becoming a major economic driver like Clinton had.

They never really had a surplus. The debt kept growing during those years. It was just being purchased by the trust fund accounts for SS and Medicare. The numbers for the outstanding debt never really seem to match with the fiscal deficit/surpluse. It's about 500 billion dollars larger this year than the reported deficit.

What difference does it make?

The country is toooooooo far gone for Hillary(god help us if she is elected) to get us to a surplus. LIFE CHANGING EVENTS WOULD HAVE TO OCCUR IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.

Ole Billy came in at the right time. Country was not too far gone so he was able to make things work. Plus.........HE GOT A BLOWJOB IN THE OVAL OFFICE! HE KNEW HOW TO HANDLE DA BUSINESS!!!!

Now, if Hillary is elected(again god help us) will she get a taco eating in the oval office?

iLester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They never really had a surplus. The debt kept
> growing during those years. It was just being
> purchased by the trust fund accounts for SS and
> Medicare.


The accounting method didn't change though, so the comparison is still valid.

Sure.

OMB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> iLester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They never really had a surplus. The debt kept
> > growing during those years. It was just being
> > purchased by the trust fund accounts for SS and
> > Medicare.
>
>
> The accounting method didn't change though, so the
> comparison is still valid.

Yes, and Clinton's speech at the DNC was right on the money for creating another surplus.

Hillary will following a democratic president Obama. Democrats always invest heavily into US technology and that usually creates a surplus.

I think a bigger question is will republicans let Hillary create a US surplus. Republicans are going to be defeating every bill that might make the US ecomony look good under Hillary.

OMB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> iLester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They never really had a surplus. The debt kept
> > growing during those years. It was just being
> > purchased by the trust fund accounts for SS and
> > Medicare.
>
>
> The accounting method didn't change though, so the
> comparison is still valid.

What was counted changed. Kind of like creating a personal budget and not counting your mortgage because you moved it to have it held in a revokable trust. You still truly are the trust and you still have to come up with the money to pay it.

Also, she'd have to cut capital gains taxes and arrange for a very fortunate convergence of something equivalent to the dot com boom, a huge population bubble with millions of people hitting their prime earning years, restructure 401ks to induce them to dump billions of dollars into the market, houses, cars, and everthing else, and a few other little details like that since the windfall from his capital gains cut was responsible for virtually all of the revenue increase.

Even then it likely would be gone quickly as they figured out how to spend the extra revenue. The only reason that we had a "surplus" then was that the windfall happened too fast to react with new spending against it. And as soon as the bubble popped it was gone.

Looks like when republicans control congress we are in the blue, when libs control it we are in the red.

Got it.

libs hate America. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like when republicans control congress we
> are in the blue, when libs control it we are in
> the red.
>
> Got it.


So what happened I the 2000's?

With the expanding US economy under Obama I would say it is possible but she'll have to cut a lot of gov programs to do it like Bill did.

If-y Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With the expanding US economy under Obama I would
> say it is possible but she'll have to cut a lot of
> gov programs to do it like Bill did.

+1

It's not likely she can get the US in the black. Clinton started with a much lower deficit.

I expect she will trim the deficit a little by riding the Obama recovering economy but she can't get it back in the black.

We will see many talking points on how she is decreasing the deficit from the Hillary administration.

History Channel's assessment = spot on.

Keep the "change" and whatever else Clinton offers..She's no different than Obama. This country is on a terrible path and it's not gonna get any better under her.

clinton was more a republican than the last republican before him, in the news

when i was listening to news and reading papers in clinton years

oddly i noted his in-persona press to the media were more republican than the last republican president's were

for instance: bill came out on news to pronounce intention to REDUCED gov school loans (not his job, interior, anyway)

that's obviously republican to say

(democrats are all unionized gov, teachers union, they get $200k / yr to teach elem. school you die, fucking facist farms, gov union)