Quote:
Originally posted by Adder
Didn't you just get done arguing how Clinton increased taxes as a means to balance the budget?
|
The amount of the deficit was reduced by the increased taxes in 93, and the amount it was reduced because of government growth is not even comparable.
I think after the 93 budget act was passed Clinton said that this action would lead to cutting the deficit in half in five to ten years. But the budget balanced in five years because of phenominal growth.
Growth is a huge factor. There have been times in the recent administration where Bush has increased discretionary spending across the board, increased entitlements, and even with the existing tax cuts, the deficit has dropped from the previous year because of economic growth. Any advancement the Bush administration has had in reducing the deficits relative to a prior years has been purely the result of economic growth. It had nothing to do with anything the administratin did. They just got lucky like Clinton did (unless you think the growth was caused by the tax cuts. But that is something even the most sophisticated economists could not even come close to agreeing on).
