View Single Post
  #184 (permalink)  
Old 12-28-2009, 03:31 PM
Joe Wicked's Avatar
Joe Wicked Joe Wicked is offline
CC Member
Visit my Photo Gallery

 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lavon, TX
Cobra Make, Engine:
Posts: 3,008
Send a message via Yahoo to Joe Wicked
Not Ranked     
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunman View Post
BeanCounter and Dan40


The is where the surplus numbers come from.

Cnn, Sept 27, 2000, six weeks before elections,

Pres Clinton announced,

$2,025 billion fed taxs collected fiscal year 2000
$1,800 billion fed budget fiscal year 2000
$225 billion surplus

In 1999 they claimed $123 billion surplus.

I don't make up the news I just read it.

Yes as a accounting method this is a crock!!! This is THEIR idea of surplus/ deficit not mine.

But, if this would have continued and the extra money was applied to the fed debt, it would of been reduced assuming it was larger than the interest.

The question was "but where is this surplus the liberals always refer to ?"

Answer, it was the difference between taxes collected and the fed budget. It was very short lived and now is history.

Sunman
Maybe I am off here, but since this states BUDGET, and not actual expenditures, it is meaningless. When was the last time the government (whoever was in charge) spent just the BUDGET. Give me the actual expenses vs taxes and I bet that surplus turns into a deficit.
__________________
Why do they call it "Common Sense" when it is so rare?