By raising taxes? Yech. I'd like to think a Republican Congress had something to do with any fiscal restraint (and I'm not sure there was that much in any case) that occurred. I think the taxes flooding in from the dot.com and stock boom had more to do with the surplus than Clinton's tax increases or Congress's belt-tightening (if any). I haven't done detailed numbers on this for the U.S., but I did do them for California, and the dot.coms (capital gains taxes) were responsible for almost all of the California surplus.
And it should also be remembered that under Clinton, defense spending went from 23 percent of the budget in 1990 to 16 percent in 2000. ($289 billion out of $1.25 trillion in 1990 to $281 billion out of $1.78 trillion in 2000. NOT adjusted for inflation. A real live spending cut in Washington!)
You can be damn sure if HillaryCare had passed, you wouldn't have seen surpluses at all.
Off Topic » in reply to Clinton's efforts to balance the budget? n/t
Re: Clinton's efforts to balance the budget?
The whole thread (24 posts)
- Pretty much tells the story here in California. And elsewhere.
- It's inevitable
- It makes sense