US debt limit nears $9 trillion

[Fleet 500]

Im just wondering what caused him to finally sign it. I dont recall a big uproar from the american people to sign it, so that leads me to believe the ammendment underwent some changes before he did. So maybe he agreed w/ it as a whole but there were some unwanted pork in it? just a hypothesis, what is the REAL story? Cause i find it hard to believe that twice he hated it and then all of a sudden he said ok republicans i dont care anymore.

And even if the republicans were the heroes then, way to screw it up now. Atleast Bill didnt screw it up then. And in today's age if you dont screw it up your a winner, it seems like thats the best we can do anymore.

Not sure; he was probably pressured into signing it (finally).

And Bill did screw it up then... he left the U.S. in a recession when he left office.

[d-quik]

you guys are ALL to extreme to realize the bad/good/stability/lack thereof

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I think that a government should be spending just as much as it brings in through Taxation, not a penny less. any surplus is money that could be going into a public interest area, like healthcare, and be doing good.

If the US makes $9 Trillion in tax, great, the accounts will balance, but even GM will tell you, theres only so many years you can make a loss.......

Mag, you've done a great job of summising what this thread should be all about, Economic policy, not foreign or domestic (Although they are invariably linked, we're not discussing what the money is used for) rather, how the money came about.

According the the original article, the US government is now overdrawn.....

[IBrake4Rainbows]

you guys are ALL to extreme to realize the bad/good/stability/lack thereof

Thankyou for this contribution.

care to share your thoughts on economic policy, or has trying to personal attack us taken a lot out of you?

[scottie300z]

And Bill did screw it up then... he left the U.S. in a recession when he left office.

Or maybe it was the republicans that screwed it up.

ha, i dunno just joking. I dunno either way. but i do find it interesting that your quick to pass the blame on him, but not any credit. But maybe there is reason, i dunno. just observation. Im not pro or anti-clinton, i dont think he was a horrible or fantastic president. atleast not as far as what the times required.

[Fleet 500]

Or maybe it was the republicans that screwed it up.

No, Bush inherited a recession from the last President (Clinton).

[zeta]

[

QUOTE=Fleet 500]No, Bush inherited a recession from the last President (Clinton).

[/QUOTE]

I believe the 'recession' at the end of 99' was due to the internet dot. com bubble burst, not Clinton. And recession meant it wasn't as great as before, not bad like it is now.
Clinton did all the right things a prez should do to make the run efficent, 8 years of peace and prosperty, and did what Reagan and GB1 could only dream(? or wanted?). Is why US conservatives love bashing him.

A ethnic cleanzing East European Tyrant, with Soviet war technology was removed from power, under Clinton, without one american casulity and not a ounce of US resources.

The US Republican conservatives in my theory, prefer when the nation has debt,
GW burnt the surplus he inherited before 911 and before any war was started, on worthless BS plan were only wealthy really benefited, and was one of the first thing he did in office.
And if you observe who is benifiting from this Iraq thing its companies like Haliburton, that was runned by the vice prez, until the word got into the media. And US oil companies Xenon Mobile, Texaco, Chevron.... (all run by conservatives) getting record profits, benefitting off the high fuel prices, THat we never saw under Clinton , cause of the conflict.

I could go on but I'll stop there

[IBrake4Rainbows]

9/11 couldn't have had anything to do with The Economic downturn experienced globally either

It's not all Bush's fault, but this is not a way to solve the situation.

[SlickHolden]

It's not all his fault, But it's pretty much almost.

[Coventrysucks]

Of course these quick actions (afghanistan/homeland security/iraq) came at a cost.

And haven't done much to solve the problem...

By saying that you won't stop untill you have "defeated" terrorism, which is impossible, you commit yourself to giving up vast sums of money fighting a war with no concievable end.

If more Americans would stop and think about 9/11 more and how scared they were on that day, there would be alot less complaining about how Bush is running the country today and even how he is dealing with iraq.

If Americans would stop and think why 9/11 happened (some people want to see Americans dead), and why "everyone" hates America, then you could actually stop terrorism, by addressing the issues that are causing people to become terrorists in the first place.

I'd love it if Americans stopped whining about 9/11.

Same here.

You don't hear people carrying on about Bali, Madrid, London...

Sometimes you'd think 9/11 was the only terrorist attack ever, but I suppose it is the only one that matters seeing as American citizens died.

If they're Spanish or something, you can act like it never happened.

[kingofthering]

whats funny is that by invading iraq/afganistan to defeat terrorism, you are actually creating more terrorists when you kill the terrorists and civilians who are caught in the crossfire

[magracer]

Mag, you've done a great job of summising what this thread should be all about, Economic policy, not foreign or domestic (Although they are invariably linked, we're not discussing what the money is used for) rather, how the money came about.

Glad it was of use...

[Fleet 500]

[

I believe the 'recession' at the end of 99' was due to the internet dot. com bubble burst, not Clinton. And recession meant it wasn't as great as before, not bad like it is now.
Clinton did all the right things a prez should do to make the run efficent, 8 years of peace and prosperty, and did what Reagan and GB1 could only dream(? or wanted?). Is why US conservatives love bashing him.

A ethnic cleanzing East European Tyrant, with Soviet war technology was removed from power, under Clinton, without one american casulity and not a ounce of US resources.

The US Republican conservatives in my theory, prefer when the nation has debt,
GW burnt the surplus he inherited before 911 and before any war was started, on worthless BS plan were only wealthy really benefited, and was one of the first thing he did in office.
And if you observe who is benifiting from this Iraq thing its companies like Haliburton, that was runned by the vice prez, until the word got into the media. And US oil companies Xenon Mobile, Texaco, Chevron.... (all run by conservatives) getting record profits, benefitting off the high fuel prices, THat we never saw under Clinton , cause of the conflict.
I could go on but I'll stop there[/QUOTE]


Actually, economic and production slowdown began in late 2000 and early 2001.

"8 years of peace and prosperity?" What about the numerous terrorist attacks during the '90s? The 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the bombing of U.S. embassies, the 2000 U.S.S. Cole bombing, etc. The truth is that terrorism flourished during the 1990s and Clinton did very little to stop it.

U.S. oil companies were also getting record (at the time) profits during the '90s.
And Halliburton also had contracts under Clinton. In fact, they were no-bid contracts which means that they automatically got them.

[werty]

"8 years of peace and prosperity?" What about the numerous terrorist attacks during the '90s? The 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the bombing of U.S. embassies, the 2000 U.S.S. Cole bombing, etc.

oh those...those are just..ummm...they didnt happen, its Bush fault no matter what..or maybe Reagan, one or the other, i'm positive it was a republican

[d-quik]

im4r i dont have time to discuss EVERYTHING that you guys said but since you requested it i will try to demonstrate soem disagreements

no need to mock

I think that a government should be spending just as much as it brings in through Taxation, not a penny less. any surplus is money that could be going into a public interest area, like healthcare, and be doing good.

If the US makes $9 Trillion in tax, great, the accounts will balance, but even GM will tell you, theres only so many years you can make a loss.......

Mag, you've done a great job of summising what this thread should be all about, Economic policy, not foreign or domestic (Although they are invariably linked, we're not discussing what the money is used for) rather, how the money came about.

According the the original article, the US government is now overdrawn.....

there is going to be a lot of macro-economical THEORY ensueing

governments that only spend what is brought in through taxation (and not a penny less) misses out on investment opportunities. for example pierre trudeau got canada into a huge debt but it was for a good cause. if he were to not borrowed money to invest, canada would still be like the 70s now. not borrowing = not investing = missed chances to develope. if there is money to borrow and you have a good cause why NOT. any competent leader with a moderate debt would borrow money for a more rewarding future. this is why stock brokers borrow money to buy stocks. if they are good enough, they can pay back the money AND THE INTEREST and STILL make money.

as for attempting to isolate economic policy, it is very difficult with the united states. unlike canada, switzerland, austria, etc etc, the USA's far-reaching policy is very global. almost ALL foreign actions are done for economic purposses. do you honestly think that the USA cares about kuwait if they didnt have oil?

as for you last sentence, i agree. however, i get the feeling that you are saying it is fatally disastrous. that is what people thought about trudeau's canadian debt, but clearly they were proven brutally incorrect as canada is pretty ownage now

the thing is that most of you guys that grew up in a developed area in a developed nation are (i dont mean this offensively, but rather objectively) spoiled. seeing something like this and most of you guys immediately complain about it. of course, this is still MUCH MUCH better than having (the opposite) an inconsiderate and ignorant population that are drones being manipulated by the government.

it doesnt really affect your personal life that much, people. sure taxes may go up but you guys are still making a crap load of money compared to the rest of the world. complaining is (again, dont take this personally) simply insulting to the people who die daily for turmoil/hunger/crime.

sorry for sounding cynical guys, perhaps it is due to my stoic and minimalistic nature. dont expect anymore apologies from me though. just try to not take thsi offensively and reply with very objective posts.